//'/?,  2i 


LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 

PRINCETON,     N.    J. 


Presented  by 


,  L_'2-7  6= 

Section )/..>...\.3 


^-^ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/bookofprophetdan132zc 


THE     BOOK 


OP     THE 


PROPHET    DANIEL 


THEOLOGICALLY    AND     HOMILETICALLY     EXPOUNDED 


Dk.    OTTO  ^OCKLER, 

PB0FE8S0B  OF  THEOLOGY   IN  THE   CNIVEK8ITY  OF  GEEIFeWALD.   PBUSSIA. 


TRANSLATED,     ENLARGED,     AND    EDITED 


Bt 
JAMES    STRONG,    S.T.D., 

»ROPE880a  OF   EXEOETICiL  TBEOLOOT   IN   DREW   THEOLOOICAL  SEMISAM,  MiDISON;  H.   J. 


NEW  YORK: 

CHARLES     SCRIBXER'S    SONS, 

1899 


■atend  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1876,  taf 

8CBIBNER,     ARMSTRONG    &     CO. 
IB  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress  at  WuhinBtoo. 


AUTHOR'S  PREFACE. 


In  the  following  exposition  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  the  undersigned  has  occupied  an  exe- 
getical  and  critical  position,  the  peculiarity  of  wliich  will  probably  not  be  overlooked,  on  a  care- 
ful comparison  mth  the  views  and  methods  of  other  recent  expositors.  Wliile  he  lias  held  fast  tc 
the  authenticity  of  the  book  as  a  wliole,  although  it  was  difficult  for  him  to  change  his  formet 
opinion  respecting  the  composition  of  the  book,  that  it  originated  during  the  Maccabsean  age, 
and  to  conform  it  to  the  results  of  the  thorough  investigations  of  M.  v.  Niebuhr,  Pusey,  Ziin- 
del,  Kranichfeld,  Volck,  Fuller,  and  othei-s,  wliich  demonstrated  its  composition  during  the 
captivity,  he  is  still  ol)liged  to  retain  liis  former  doubts  with  respect  to  tlic  greater  portion  of 
Chap.  xi.  ^particularly  vs.  .5-39).  The  reasons  which  determine  him  to  this  conclusion,  are 
certainly  of  an  internal  character  only.  They  result  in  the  conviction  that  a  particularizing 
prophecy,  cmljracing  the  history  of  centuries,  as  it  is  found  in  that  section,  forms  so  marked  a 
contrast  to  everything  in  the  line  of  specializing  i)rediction  that  occurs  elsewliere  in  the  pro- 
phetic literature  of  the  Old  Testament,  that  only  the  theory  of  an  interpolating  revision  of  its 
prophetic  contents,  imposed  on  it  during  the  period  of  the  Seleucid  persecutions,  or  soon 
afterward,  seems  to  afford  a  really  satisfactory  explanation  of  its  paiticulars.  Granted,  that 
In  the  face  of  tlie  unanimous  testimony  of  all  the  external  witnesses  to  the  integrity  of  tlie  pro- 
phet's text,  the  subjective  nature  of  a  criticism,  such  as  is  involved  in  this  conclusion,  may  l)e 
censured;  granted,  that  it  may  be  termed  inconsequent,  that  the  intimate  unity  of  the  well- 
planned,  well-adapted,  and  well-arranged  work  is  thus  broken  through  at  but  a  single  point ; 
yet  the  analoyia  visionis prophetic/B,  whicli  furnishes  the  motive  for  our  decision,  appears  to  us 
to  be  no  less  a  cert.ain,  objectively  admissible,  and  most  weighty  criterion  in  critical  questions 
like  the  present,  than  is  the  analorjia  fidei  in  tlie  domain  of  Scriptural  dogmatics.  Nor  wag 
the  solution  of  the  many  difficulties  that  were  encountered,  as  it  resulted  from  the  assumption 
of  an  e.K  eventu  interpolation  at  a  single  point,  permitted  to  restrain  us  from  submitting  tlie  pro- 
gressive results  of  our  investigation  to  the  careful  inspection  of  Biblical  scholare  belonging  to 
wider  circles,  so  far  as  the  plan  and  design  of  the  theological  and  houiiletical  Bible-work 
permitted  such  a  course.  [The  American  reviser  has  taken  the  liberty  of  combating  the  au- 
tlior's  view  as  to  tlie  interpolation  of  the  passage  in  question.] 

In  llie  treatment  of  a  prophetic  book  like  the  one  before  us,  it  is  evident  that  the  homiletic 
element  must  occupy  a  very  subordinate  place.  Nor  could  it  be  a  principal  aim  for  an  exegete 
to  obtain  dogmatic  results  and  modes  of  presenting  them,  from  such  a  prophet  as  Daniel. 
For  this  reason  we  have  preferred  to  follow  the  example  of  one  of  our  esteemed  co-laljorers 
(Dr.  Biihr,  in  his  exposition  of  the  Books  of  Kings),  and  accordingly  we  have  given  the  title 
of  "  i?<^  (CO- fundamental  principles  related,  to  the  history  of  salvation^'  to  the  section  ordinarily 
devoted  to  that  object,  and  in  the  same  connection  we  have  noticed  the  apologetic  questions 
that  jjreseuted  themselves,  and  also  have  indicated  what  was  suitable  for  practical  and  homi- 
letical  treatment,  in  addition  to  the  features  designated  by  that  heading. 

We  have  devoted  an  especially  careful  attention,  as  in  the  case  of  our  former  exposition  of 
the  Song  of  Solomon,  to  the  history  and  literature  of  the  exposition  of  tliis  prophet,  both  as  a 
whole  and  with  reference  to  its  principal  parts  severally.  Especially  has  the  history  of  the 
exposition  of  the  difficult  and  important  vision  of  the  70  weeks  of  years,  ^chap.  ix.,  24-27,) 
l.een  sketched  by  us  as  thoroughly  as  was  possiljle,  more  thoroughly,  we  believe,  than  in  anj 
of  the  recent  and  latest  commentaries  on  Daniel. 


AtJTHOR'S   PREFACE. 


Of  the  most  recent  exegetical  and  critical  literature  on  this  projihet,  it  was  unfortunately 
impossible  to  notice  two  works  that  a|)|)earecl  while  this  book  was  in  press :  the  commentary 
of  Kt'il  (in  Keil  and  Delitzsch's  Bible-work  on  the  O.  T.),  and  the  monograph  by  P.  Caspari 
Znf  Eiiifuhrmig  in  das  Buck  Daniel  (Leipsic,  Dorffling  und  Franke). 

3Iay  our  attem])t  to  add  a  further  new  and  independent  contribution  to  the  exegetical  lite- 
rature on  the  most  mysterious  and  difficult  of  all  the  prophets,  which  has  recently  been  enriched 
by  somewhat  numerous,  and  in  some  respects  not  uuiniportant  treatises,  find  that  tolerant  recep- 
tion, at  least  on  the  part  of  Biljle  students  who  share  our  views  in  substance,  which  it  may 
ai^propriately  claim,  in  view  of  the  unusual  difficulty  attending  the  execution  of  it<!  object. 

Db,  zookler. 

Oreijmald,  April.  1869 


THE    PROPHET    DANIEL. 


INTRODUCTION. 


§  1.  The  Book  of  Daniei,,  Considered  as  a  Protottpe  op  the  Canonical  Apocaltpss. 

The  peculiarities  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  which  explain,  on  the  one  hand,  its  position  in  the 
Jewish  canon  among  the  historical  Hagiographa,  and,  on  the  other,  its  being  classed  in  the 
Septuagint,  Vulgate,  and  Luther,  with  the  writings  of  the  greater  prophets,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 
and  Ezekiel,  are  both  internal  and  external.  They  arise  chiefly  from  the  circumstance  that 
the  writer  lived  and  wrought  in  Bahylonia,  not  as  a  member  of  the  community  of  exiled  Jews, 
but  as  a  naturalized  Bal>ylonian  at  the  court  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his  successors — not,  like 
Ezekiel,  discharging  priestly  functions  among  his  people,  but  performing  duty  as  an  oflicer  of 
the  state  and  chief  of  the  Magi.  He  was  thus  jjossessed  of  honors  and  emoluments  akin  to 
those  of  Joseph,  his  patriarchal  prototype,  at  the  court  of  the  Egy|)tian  Pharaoh ;  but  his 
removal,  at  a  later  date,  from  his  prominent  position,  and  his  death,  not  long  after  the  over- 
throw of  the  ChaldiBan  dynasty  by  the  Persians,  prevented  his  exerting  a  decisive  influence  on 
the  welfare  of  his  people. 

The  book  of  Daniel's  prophecies  owes  its  origin  to  a  period  of  the  deepest  national  misery  of 
the  people  of  God — a  time  of  the  profoundest  degradation  and  confusion,  which  linds  its  only 
parallel  in  the  condition  of  Israel,  when,  wholly  separated  from  its  native  soU,  it  languished 
in  Egypt,  the  ignominious  "  house  of  bondage  "  and  oppressive  "  iron  furnace"  (Deut.  v.  6  ; 
iv.  20 ;  1  Kings  viii.  51 ;  Jer.  xi.  4) ;  but  this  earlier  period  has  its  counterpart  here,  not  only 
retrospectively  as  regards  the  severity  of  the  judgment  and  humiliation,  but  also  prospectively 
as  respects  the  abundance  of  gracious  visitation,  and  the  wonderful  displays  of  the  Divine 
powei'.  love,  and  faithfulness.  Both  the  humiliation  and  the  glory  present  in  the  humiliation 
are  revealed  in  these  prophecies.  "Yhejirst  or  historical  division  of  the  book  records  chiefly  the 
miracles  by  which  the  grace  of  God  was  magnified  in  those  who  remained  faithful  during 
years  of  apostasy,  suffering,  and  banishment.  The  comfortless  condition  and  utter  degeneracy 
of  the  nation  are  seen  principally  in  the  second  part,  the  visions  and  prophetical  pictures  of 
which  describe  the  present  and  immediate  future  as  a  period  of  severe  oppression,  universal 
apostasy,  and  unquestioned  supremacy  of  the  world-powers  arrayed  against  God,  at  the  close 
of  which  period  the  Messianic  lera  of  salvation  is  finally  introduced.  According  to  this 
division  the  whole  consists  of  two  books — one  of  narratives  (chap,  i.-vi.),  and  the  other  ol 
visions  (chap,  vii.-xii.) — which  are  about?  equal  in  length.  This  circumstance  forms  a  marked 
peculiarity  of  Daniel,  as  compared  with  the  other  prophetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  sometimes  interweave  the  historical  element  with  the  prophetical  {e.g.,  Amos,  Isa.,  Jer., 
etc.),  and  at  others,  either  reduce  the  former  to  narrow  limits  {e.g.,  Joel,  Micah,  Zechariah, 
e'c),  *r  bring  it  into  such  prominence  as  to  exclude  the  ofiice  of  the  seer  (.lonah).  Tliis  bal- 
ance between  narrative  and  prophecy,  which  exists  only  in  Daniel,  has  its  explanation  in  ta« 


2  INTRODTJCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

origiu  of  the  book  in  a  strange  land  and  in  a  time  of  exile — circumstances  which  f  orliade  an 
arrancremout  in  direct  and  perfect  harmony  with  the  form  of  prophetical  literature  in  general. 
These  circumstances  also  serve  to  account  for  peculiarities  in  the  language  oi  the  book :  for  its 
composition,  to  the  extent  of  about  one-half  in  Hel)rew,  and  the  remainder  (chaj).  ii.  4  b.-cbap. 
vii.)  in  the  Araninean  or  Chaldee  idiom,  which  gradually,  and  as  a  consequence  of  the  Babylo- 
nian captivity  and  of  the  Persian  supremacy,  bscam?  the  language  of  the  Palestinian  .Jews,  i- 
due  solely  to  its  origin,  not  only  in  a  time  of  exile,  but  among  the  scenes  of  the  exile,  and  ai 
the  court  of  the  barbarous  conquerors.  The  historical  book  of  Ezra,  which  ap])earcd  immedi- 
ately at  the  close  of  the  exile,  is  the  only  one  of  the  Old-Testament  Scriptures  which  shares 
this  peculiarity  of  language,  while  the  prophetical  Ijooks  {e.g.,  Jeremiah,  which  originated  at 
the  time  of  the  exile  and  when  its  author  was  in  constant  intercourse  with  the  Babylonians), 
merely  contain  isolated  ArauiJEan  words  or  paragraplis  (see  especially  Jer.  x.  11). 

The  peculiar  literary  traits  and  theological  contents  of  this  book,  especially  in  its  second  or 
prophetical  part,  likewise  find  their  explanation  in  its  origin  among  the  scenes  of  the  cap- 
tivity. The  prophecies  of  Daniel,  conveyed  generally  in  the  form  of  dreams  and  visions,  and 
nowhere  enforced  l)y  inspired  addresses  or  exhortations,  and  concerning  themselves  chiefly,  if 
not  exclusively,  with  the  fate  of  the  all-controlling  world-power,  on  the  one  hand,  and,  on  the 
other,  with  the  final  triumpli  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  of  God,  are  thus  distinguished  from  the 
earlier  proiihetical  \vritings  by  peculiarities  which  mark  the  book  as  the  pattern  for  the  so- 
called  apocalyptic  prophecies.  In  ordinary  proijhecies  the  people  of  God  had  usually  occupied 
the  foreground  of  vision,  while  the  world-powers  by  which  they  were  threatened,  were  only 
noticed  incidentally,  and  made  the  objects  of  "burdens"  or  threatening  prophecies,  as  iso- 
lated representatives  of  the  sjjirit  that  opposes  God.  Daniel,  on  the  contrary,  takes  his  posi- 
tion in  the  heart  of  that  world-power,  whicli  had  overthrown  and  subjugated  all  tlie  nations 
of  the  East,  and  among  them  the  chosen  race.  From  this  point  of  vision  he  foretells  the  rise 
of  a  new  world-kingdom,  which  shall  destroy  the  present  empire,  to  be  followed,  in  turn,  by 
another  and  still  greater  power,  and  so  on  to  the  end,  when  an  eternal  kingdom  of  truth  and 
righteousness  shall  be  established  on  their  ruins,  by  the  direct  interference  of  the  God  of  heaven. 
The  result  of  all  earthly  development,  and  the  succession  of  judgments  visited  on  the  enemies  of 
God's  people,  closing  with  the  Messianic  or  general  judgment,  form  the  subject  of  this  pro- 
phecy; and  the  grandeur  of  its  field  of  vision,  compassing  all  liistory  and  embracing  the 
world,  together  with  tlie  visional  clothing  of  its  teaching  and  the  profound  symljolism  of  its 
eschatological  descriptions,  constitute  the  features  v.hicli  stamp  it  as  an  apocalypse,  in  distinc- 
tion from  all  earlier  piophecy.  Within  the  Old  Testament,  this  form  of  prophetical  writing 
is  ai)proached  by  the  closing  chapters  of  Ezekiel  (xl.-xlviii.),  but  it  is  directly  represented 
only  in  tlie  former  half  of  Z^chariah  (chap,  i.-viii.),  where  the  model  found  in  Daniel  was 
probably  copied.  In  the  New  Testament  it  is  found,  if  we  except  certain  brief  sections  in  the 
Qosjjelsand  Paulina  epistles  (the  eschatological  discourse  in  Matt,  xxiv.,  xxv.,  and  parallel  pas- 
sages, and  2  Thess.  ii.),  only  in  the  Revelation  of  St.  John,  which  is  a  direct  copy  and  con- 
tinuation of  the  prophecies  of  Daniel. 

Th  'S '  peculiarities,  as  numerous  as  they  are  api)arent  and  significant,  exjjlain  why  the  booh 
of  Daniel  was  separated  [in  the  Hebrew  Bible]  fiom  the  other  prophets  and  ])laced  among 
the  Hagiograplia,  when  the  Old-Testament  canon  was  formed.  Its  internal  features,  consist- 
ing in  an  embrace  of  all  history  with  an  eschatological  aim,  joined  to  a  visional  and  symboli- 
cal dress,  which  stamp  it  as  the  model  of  all  Biblical  (and  extra-Biljlical  or  apocryjjhal)  apoc- 
alypse, would  not  of  themselves  have  compelled  such  a  separation ;  since  many  of  the  later 
propVietical  writings  display  clear  transitions  in  matter  and  form  to  the  field  of  apocalypse, 
and  permit  tlie  distinction  between  this  ri))est  fruit  of  Scriptural  jjrophetical  development 
and  propliecy  in  the  narrower  sense,  to  appear  as  the  result  of  the  gradual  growth.  The  decisive 
reason  for  the  disposition  made  of  this  book,  must  be  found  in  its  peculiar  division  into 
historical  and  prophetical  parts,  and  in  its  composition  in  Hebrew  and  Aramaic.  This 
npp^ars  with  irrefragal>le  certainty  from  its  assignment  to  a  place  immediately  before  Ezra,  the 
only  other  book  in  tlie  canon  which  frames  in  Chaldee  a  section  of  considerable  extent  between 
the  Hebrew  portions  of  its  text. 


DA>'IEL  AS  A  PROTOTYPE  OF  THE  APOCALYPSE. 


An  additional  circumstance,  wliith  may  have  contributed  to  placing  the  present  book  amonj; 
the  Hagiographa,  was  the  [presumed]  reiHsiim  of  its  prophetical  portion,  apparently  by  a  pioun 
seer  of  Maccabrean  times,  who  sought  to  establish  as  exact  a  relation  as  was  possible  betweet 
the  prophecy  and  its  historical  fulfillment,  as  observed  by  him.  This  later  revision,  whicl 
affected  especially  the  contents  of  chapters  x.-xii.,  will  be  considered  below,  in  connection 
with  the  question  of  genuineness  and  integrity. 

Note  1. — With  reference  to  the  circumstanceg  of  the  times — so  deplorable  in  their  condition 
and  yet  so  full  of  displays  of  Divine  grace  and  wonderful  providences — to  wV  ic-h  the  book  of 
Daniel  owes  its  origin,  HaveiTiick.  in  the  introduction  to  his  commentary  (page  16  et  seq.),  is 
especially  thorough  and  instructive.  He  justly  disputes  the  opinion  of  Winer,  de  Wette,  Lee 
(Jiidische  Oeschichtf,  p.  188),  and  others,  according  to  which  the  situation  of  the  captive  Jews 
was  not  one  of  especial  hardship.  "  Tlie  shame  there  inflicted  on  Israel  was  not  exactly  insig- 
nificant, when  it  could  ins|3ire  pious  and  faithful  men  with  a  holy  revenge,  and  lead  them  to 
invoke  the  Divine  indignation  on  their  tormentors  !  Remember  the  137th  Psalm  and  the 
audacious  desecration  of  the  Temple  vessels  by  Belshazzar,  as  Dan.  v.  records,  which  lead  to  the 
conclusion  tliat  such  conduct  was  of  frequent  occurrence.  Even  martyrs  to  the  truth,  cheer- 
ful and  undismayed  while  testifying  that  Jehovah  alone  is  God  and  none  beside  Him,  are 
revealed  in  the  history  of  Daniel  and  his  friends  (Dan.  iii.  and  vi.)  ;  to  which  event  the  obser- 
vation and  experience  of  the  wise  preacher  perhaps  refer,  when  he  remarks  that  '  there  is  a 
just  man  that  perisheth  in  his  righteousness'  (Ecc.  ^ii.  15).*  When  we  consider  the  internal 
state  of  the  nation  in  this  period,  we  find  further  abundant  reason  for  complaint,  because  of 
Israel's  sin  and  misery.  Ezekiel  addressed  the  people  with  earnest  censure,  because  they 
listened  to  his  words,  but  refused  to  ol)ey  them,  when  he  condemned  their  ways  (Eze.  xxxiii. 
30,  sq.),  in  which  they  dishonored  God  among  the  heathen,  and  continued  to  murder,  work 
abomination,  and  violate  chastity,  until  men  asked.  'Are  the.se  the  people  of  the  Lord,  that 
are  gone  forth  out  of  His  land*'  (xxxiii.  20;  xxxvi.  20,  21;  cf.  chap,  xxxiv.).  Wliere, 
indeed,  could  greater  opportunity  l)e  found  for  indulgence  in  heathen  customs  by  the  Israel- 
ites, who  were  at  all  times  excessively  addicted  to  idolatry,  than  in  Baliylon,  which  was 
notorious  as  the  home  of  luxury  and  idolatry  ?  Hence,  we  must  deplore  the  profound  sense 
of  sin,  and  of  being  forsaken  liy  God,  which  is  so  clearly  revealed,  not  only  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  temple,  and  the  expulsion  of  Israel  from  the  holy  land,  but  also  in  the  lack  of 
prophecy  (cf.  Sam.  ii.  i) ;  Psa.  Ixxiv.  9) ;  and  which  finds  its  most  striking  exjiression  in  the 
prayer  of  Daniel,  uttered  before  the  Lord  in  the  name  of  the  people,  toward  the  end  of  the 
captivity.!  \  diffurent  class,  who  preferred  the  cunditiim  of  the  exile  to  the  hairy  garment 
of  the  prophet  and  the  rigorous  serTic:e  of  .lehovah,  would  doulitless  enjoy  their  situation.  If 
there  were  no  other  proof  of  this,  it  would  appear  from  the  fact  that  many  preferred  to  remain 
in  Babylon  at  tlie  close  of  the  exile.  But  the  fate  of  these  apostate  souls,  who.  by  the  Divine 
decree,  were  at  tliis  exact  juncture  separated  and  cast  out  as  dregs  from  the  healthy  and 
pious  portion  of  tlie  nation,  was  none  the  less  deplorable  on  that  account."  .  .  .  Further, 
page  20  :  '•  But  the  wretched  and  outcast  nation  was,  and  still  continued  to  be,  the  j>ea]ile  oj 
His  covpnant,  and,  therefore,  despite  their  low  est.ite.  the  elect  and  favorite  nation  of  the  Lord. 
They  were  not  merely  to  contiime  until  the  days  of  tlieir  great  destiny  were  fulfilled,  but,  for 
Jehovah's  sake,  they  were  to  be  glorified  among  the  heathen.  As,  therefore.  He  had  always 
afforded  tliem  miraculous  aid  in  seasons  of  great  tribulation,  so  extraordinary  signs  and  events, 
that  transcended  the  ordinary  course  of  nature,  now  occurred  and  secured  the  good  of  Israel 
while  they  alarmed  the  Gentiles  ;  but  at  the  same  time  these  pointed  forward,  without  exception, 
to  the  future  realization  of  the  great  pl.an  of  salvation,  whose  end  is  the  redemption  of  sinful 
man  .  .  .  Prophecies  and  wonders  were  the  gracious  means  with  which  Jehovah  overwhelmed 
Israel  and  compelled  it.  to  abide  l:>y  Him,  but  through  which,  also,  the  determined  apostates 
who  would  not  turn  to  God,  were  finally  cut  out,  so  that  a  purified  people,  which  agreed  in 
confessing  Israel's  God  at  least  in  outward  form,  could  return  to  the  land  of  its  fathers,"  etc. — This 
view  of  the  time  of  Daniel  and  its  significance,  which  is  held  by  orthodox  exegetes,  with  few 
exceptions  (see  particularly  Auberlen,  Drr  Pruphet  Daniel,  etc.,  2d  ed.,  p.  26  et  seq.)  is  rejected 

*  [Theae  arguments  of  Hiivemick,  however,  are  not  in  point  to  show  the  general  oppression  of  the  Jews  m  the  latter 
portion  of  the  Babylonian  exile.  The  treatment  of  the  three  Hebrew  children,  and  at  times  of  Daniel  himself,  are  only 
occasional  and  exceptional  instances  of  Orienbil  despotism,  when  aroused  by  opposition  to  an  arbitrary  and  universal  edict, 
as  the  immunity  and  even  honors  following  evince.  The  book  of  Esther  contains  an  apt  commentary  on  these  capricious 
Ticissitudes.    The  reference  to  the  passage  in  Eccles,  is  particularly  inapposite,  as  that  book  belongs  to  the  Solomonic  age.] 

t  [On  the  contrary  it  appears  that  the  chastisement  of  I-rael  by  the  captivity,  became,  as  it  was  intended  to  be,  an 
•ffcctual  cure  of  oatward  idolatry.  The  very  sight  of  the  abomin.ations  practised  by  their  heathen  captors,  seems,  as  in  the 
case  of  similar  close  cintact  with  polytheism  in  Egypt,  to  have  thoroughly  d'sgusted  and  warned  them  from  ail  such  ten- 
dencies. The  prayer  of  Daniel,  alluded  to  by  the  author,  is  only  a  general  confession  of  the  pwit  sins  of  the  nation,  for 
which  the  e.'cile,  now  drawing  near  its  close,  is  recognized  as  the  iust  oenaltv.  The  passages  in  Ezekiel  have  a  much  ear Un 
•tate.l 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


by  rationalists,  inasmuch,  as  has  already  bren  remarked,  they  do  not  admit  that  Israel's  con- 
dition during  tlie  captivity  was  especially  deploralile  and  fallen,  noi-  acknowledge  the  histori- 
cal character  of  the  narratives  respecting  the  wonderful  displays  of  Divine  power  and  grace, 
which  are  recorded  in  this  l)ook.  And  yet  another  collection  of  prophecies,  whose  jrigin  in 
the  time  of  the  exile  and  at  Babylon  is  considered  by  rationalistic  critics  to  be  an  .ncontro- 
veitible  fact,  substantiates  the  view  in  question  concerning  the  conditions  of  the  time  whicli 
underlie  our  book,  in  all  its  bearings,  and  in  many  respects,  even  in  its  smallest  details.  The 
second  part  of  the  prophet  Isaiah — wliether  with  the  modem  critics,  we  consider  it  as  the 
'■  Pseudo-Isaiah "  or  "  the  exilian  Isaiah,"  or  admit  its  genuineness  and  therewith  its 
thoroughly  prophetic  character — describes  the  condition  of  the  exiled  nation  in  Baljylon,  as 
well  as  the  striking  contrast  between  their  religious  and  national  ruin  and  wickedness,  and  the 
miracles  by  whicli  the  grace  of  God  was  magnified  in  them,  in  precisely  the  same  colors  as  does 
the  book  of  Daniel,  and  therefore  serves  to  e.staljlish  the  authenticity  of  the  contents  of  this 
book  in  an  impressive  manner.  Isaiah's  lamentations  because  of  the  turning  of  many  to  idola- 
try (chap.  xlvi.  6,  etc. ;  Ivii.  5,  etc.  ;  Ix.  3,  etc.) ;  because  of  umighteousness,  wanton  revelry, 
and  violence  (chap.  Ivi.  11;  Iviii.  2,  etc. ;  lix.  3,  etc) ;  because  of  the  discouragement  and 
lack  of  faith  among  even  the  best  of  the  exiles  (chap.  Ix.  27 ;  xlix.  24  ;  li.  12,  etc.  ;  xlv.  9, 
etc. )  and  on  account  of  the  rebellious  disposition  and  insolent  .stul :il)omness  of  the  masses  (xlviii. 
4.  8.  10;  Ixiii.  17;  Ixiv.  7,  etc.) — all  these  merely  recapitulate  in  detail  what  is  briefly  com- 
prehended in  Daniel's  priestly  confession  and  penitential  prayer  in  the  affecting  language  of 
bitter  lamentation.*  Furthermore,  the  manner  in  which  the  deutero-Isaiah  refers  to  the  mar- 
vellous power  and  majesty  of  -Jehovah,  as  revealed  in  wonderful  signs  of  every  sort  (chap.  xliv. 
6  ;  xlv.  11),  in  multitudes  of  ])rophecies  and  promises  that  have  been  realized  (cha]).  xli.  21  et 
seq.  ;  xliii.  9  et  seq.  ;  xliv.  7  et  seq.  ;  xlv.  19,  21 ;  xlvi.  10;  xlix.  3  etscq.),  and  in  the  humili- 
ation and  destruction  of  heathen  idols  and  their  worshippers,  touches  closely  upon  the  corres- 
ponding descriptions  in  both  parts  of  Daniel,  the  historical  as  well  as  the  prophetical  and 
symbolical  (see  especially  chap.  ii.  47  ;  iii.  28  ;  iv.  31  et  seq. ;  vi.  27  et  seq. ;  vii.  13  et  seq.  ; 
is.  24  et  seq.).  The  relations  of  God's  people  to  tlieir  heathen  oppressors  and  their  gods,  on 
the  one  hand,  and  to  their  covenant  God,  Jehovah,  and  His  displays  of  grace  and  promises 
of  deliverance,  on  the  other,  are  described  by  I)oth  ])rophets  with  substantially  the  same  re- 
sult ;  and  there  remains  only  this  difference,  that  the  mode  of  statement  employed  by  Isaiah, 
accords  with  the  older  usage  of  spoken  and  written  prophetical  language,  while  Daniel  illus- . 
trates  the  fate  of  kingdoms  in  the  present  and  future  from  a  decidedly  apocalyptic  point  of 
view.  The  following  note  treats  specifically  of  this  important  difference  between  our  prophet 
and  liis  earlier  predecessors. 

Note  2. — The  relation  of  Daniel,  as  the  original  representative  of  Scriptural  apocalypse,  to 
the  earlier  prophets,  is  considered  in  an  especially  instructive  manner  by  Auberlen  {Der 
Prophet  Daniel,  etc.,  \>.  2  sq.):  "The  prophets  generally  occupy  an  intro-Israelitish  stand- 
point, from  whence  they  view  the  future  of  God's  kingdom.  The  congregation  of  His  people 
constantly  occupies  the  foreground  with  them,  and  the  world-j)owei's  enter  their  range  of 
vision  only  as  they  interfere  in  the  present  or  immediate  future  of  God's  people.  .  .  .  The 
contrary  holds  with  Daniel.  Himself  separated  fiom  the  lioly  land  and  nation,  and  living 
and  discharging  duty  as  a  high  official  at  the  Babylonian  and  Persian  courts,  he  presents  the 
development  of  the  world-power  at  the  outset  as  the  cliief  object  of  his  prophecies,  and  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  relegated  significantly  to  the  background.  If  the  other  prophets  glance 
occasionally  from  their  post  in  Zion  to  the  south,  the  north,  or  the  east,  as  one  or  another 
world-kingdom  is  presented  to  their  vision,  Daniel,  from  the  heart  of  the  world-power,  over- 
looks its  entire  development,  and  not  until  his  glance  has  penetrated  through  all  its  changing 
forms  does  he  rest  in  Zion,  recognizing  her  affliction  and  punishment,  but  also  her  triumph 
and  exaltation.  The  prophecies  of  Daniel  no  longer  relate  merely  to  single  and  contempora- 
neous world-kingdoms  of  greater  or  less  importance;  but  rather  the  p_eriod  of  universal  mon- 
archies has  Ijegun.  which  rise  in  succession  to  universal  conquest,  and  in  whose  deportment 
the  worldly  principle  that  opposes  the  reign  of  God  is  revealed  in  steadily-increasing  power 
and  hostility.  Intimately  connected  with  this  is  the  further  peculiarity  of  Daniel,  that  his 
prophecies  contain  a  much  greater  wealth  of  historical  and  political  detail  than  those  of  all 
other  prophets.  AVhile  prophecy  generally,  viewing  the  near  and  tlie  distant  in  perspective,  is 
accustomed  to  regard  the  entire  future  from  an  eschatological  point  of  view  as  the  coming  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  Daniel,  on  the  conti-ary,  sees  spread  before  him  substantially  the  future 
history  of  the  world  which  must  transpire  before  the  advent  of  the  kingdom.  Hence  results 
ihe  special  form  of  prophecy  which  is  peculiar  to  him  alone.  If  this  were  in  any  case  a  his- 
tory of  the  future,  it  would  be  with  so  him."     The  idea,  that  the  notice  in  detail  of  the  several 

*  [The  passages  of  Isaiah  here  cited  depict  in  part  the  idolatry  of  the  heathen,  with  which  the  chosen  n-ition  arc  con- 
trasted, and  in  part  the  degeneracy  of  the  prophet's  countrymen  in  his  own  day.  for  which  the  captivity  was  lo  be  a  punish 
meiit.  Few,  if  any  of  them,  necessarily  imply  anything  more  than  tha^  discouragement,  which  a  long  delay  of  the  promised 
deliverance  would  naturally  engender.  1 


DANIEL  AS  A  PROTOTYPE  OF  THE  APOCALYPSE. 


features  of  progress  iu  tlie  future  development  of  the  world- power  and  its  relations  to  Gud's 
people,  is  a  final  chief  jicculianty  of  Daniel's  prophecies,  is  based  principally  on  the  contents 
of  chap,  xi.,  which  Auberleu  regards  as  written  throughout  by  Daniel  and  soon  after  the 
captivity.  We  Ijelieve  ourselves  warranted  in  holding  a  different  \-iew  respecting  this 
chapter,  which  is  the  chief  support  for  the  assumption  of  a  continued  series  of  tlie  must 
special  predictions,  and  therefore  prefer  to  accept  a  revision  in  the  time  of  Antiochus 
Eiiiplianes,  by  a  pious  apocalyptic  investigator.  Hence  we  charge  the  thorough  description 
of  the  kingdoms  of  the  Seleucidse  clown  to  tliat  tyrant,  to  the  account  of  the  modifying 
agency  of  this  interpolator.  We  are  not  led  to  this  view,  either  by  a  preconceived  opinion 
that  the  Spirit  of  prophecy  is  incapable  of  jjroducing  such  special  predictions,  or  by  a  one- 
sided reference  to  the  analogy  of  the  remaining  |>roplietical  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  contain  no  such  detailed  descriptions  of  the  future ;  but  the  decisive  circumstance 
which  arouses  our  suspicion  concerning  the  assumption  that  Dan.  xi.  is  throughout  and 
in  all  its  details  a  proper  prediction,  and  which  even  directly  forbids  it,  is  the  fact  tliat  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John,  besides  our  book  the  only  independent  and  more  comiirehensive  produc- 
tion of  tlie  canonical  apocalypse,  eivru where  presents  only  ideal  pkUires  •>/  the  future.  We 
admit  that  the  propliet,  borne  liy  the  Spirit  of  prophecy,  would,  at  tlie  point  in  question, 
receive  many  surprisingly  exact  disclosures  respecting  the  future  history  of  tlie  God-opposecl 
world-power  and  its  hostility  towards  the  people  of  God,  because  we  regard  Daniel,  the  "  vir 
desiderioruni"'  (chap.  x.  11 ).  as  pre-eminent  in  zeal  and  successful  effort,  among  the  Old-Testa- 
ment prophets  who,  according  to  1  Pet.  i.  11,  searched  "what,  or  what  manner  of  time  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  wliicli  was  in  them  did  signify."  But  precisely  because  he  was  only  a 
searcher  of  the  future  and  could  lie  no  more  than  this,  we  are  compelled  to  reject  everything 
that  transforms  his  prophecy  irom  a  Divinely  insjiired  picture  of  the  future  into  a  detailed 
and  painfully  exact  history  of  the  future,  and  we  therefore  charge  this  portion  to  the  account 
of  the  reviser.  Daniel  is  and  remains  for  us  a  "  prophetic  light  for  tlie  times  devoid  of 
revelation,  during  which  Israel  was  given  into  the  hands  of  the  heathen,"  a  "light  that  was 
designed  to  illumine  the  night  of  five  liuudi"ed  years  from  the  Cajitivity  to  Christ  and  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans,  for  the  understanding  ones  iu  Israel"  (Auberlen, 
p.  80);  liut  we  cannot  assume  that  the  clear  prophetic  light  which  emanated  from  him  was 
intended  to  penetrate  to  the  smallest  comers  aAl  most  gloomy  recesses  of  the  history  of  God's 
people  which  was.  for  him,  yet  future.*  But  if  we  can  assent  to  Auberlen's  description  of 
the  canonical  apocalypses  as  prophetical  disclosures,  intended  to  "serve  the  congregation  of 
God's  people  as  lights  during  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  (Luke  xxi.  24)  in  wliicli  there  is  no 
revelation,"  only  on  the  condition  that  we  conceive  their  light  iu  an  ideal  sense,  and  as  corre- 
sponding to  the  fundamental  law  in  the  Divine  revelation  of  gradual  and  mediate  disclosure, 
we  are  none  the  less  compelled  on  the  other  liand  to  reject  decidedly  a  special  feature, 
admitted  by  Liicke,  Hilgenfeld,  and  others,  into  their  conception  of  the  idea  of  apocalypse, 
a  conception  which  otherwise  conforms  approximately  to  that  of  Auberlen.  We  refer  to  the 
idea  of  p««i«Zf)«ym/?^,  concerning  which  hiXcke  {Einleitung  in  die  Offenharung  Johannis  und 
die  soyenannte  apolcalyptische  Literatur,  2d  ed.,  p.  47  sq.)  asserts  that  it  is  necessarily  connected 
with  the  other  two  distinguishing  features  of  apocalyptic  propliecy,  its  eschatological.  and  its 
comprehensive  character  that  covers  all  history,  since  only  later  WTiters  wlio  cunningly  related 
the  prophecies  to  the  past  and  invented  additions  to  the  older  prophets,  were  capable  of  such 
all-embracing  vision.  The  oiie-sidedn&ss  and  rashness  of  this  assertion  likewise  appear  from 
the  mode  of  origin  and  the  literary  peculiarities  of  the  Revelation  by  St.  .lohn,  this  most 
important  and  significant  of  apocalypses,  against  which  no  more  unjust  criticism  can  be 
offered  than  that  of  a  pseudonyraic  origin;  and  not  less  from  the  notorious  authenticity  of 
the  former  half  of  the  book  of  Zechariah  (chai).  i.-viii.),  the  remaining  apocalyptic  composi- 
tion that  has  been  admitted  to  the  Old-Testament  canon,  and  which  may  be  regarded  as  the 
earliest  imitation  of  Daniel.  We  can  yield  our  assent  to  the  charge  of  forgery  as  regards  this 
form  of  writing,  in  so  far  only  as  it  applies  to  the  apocryjilial  apocalypses,  and  are  therefore 
in  accord  with  Hilgenfeld  (Die  jadische  Ap^dalyptik  in  ihrer  (/eschichtlirhen  Enticicklung,  IS.^i?, 
p.  5  sq.) — -whose  view  diverges  somewhat  from  that  of  Liicke — -no  further  than  as  he  excepts 
the  Joliannean  apocalypse  from  the  canon  of  Liicke,  which  stamps  pseudonyuiity  as  the 
invariable  mark  of  a|)oc;dyptic  literature ;  but  to  this  exception  we  add  the  two  apocalypses 
of  the  canimic'.tl  Old  Testament,  f     For  tlie  more  special  consideration  of  the  relations  of 

•  [To  those  far  removed  from  all  inlluence  of  the  prevalent  rationalism  of  German  criticism,  the  insidious  tincture  oi 
which,  notwithsL-indrng  the  authors  disclaimer,  is  evident  in  his  conclusion  on  this  point,  the  ascription  of  any  portion 
of  the  book  of  Deniel  to  a  later  nameless  writer  on  such  purely  subjective  grounds,  must  appear  altogether  gratuitc  us. 
The  business  of  the  interpreter  is.  not  to  prescribe  what  God  was  likely  to  cause  a  prophet  to  predict,  but  to  accept  and 
expound  accordingly  what  historical  and  substantial  testimony  has  delivered  to  us  as  the  actual  words  of  prophecy. 
There  is  no  more  evidence  of  a  pseudo-Daniel  than  of  a  pseudo-Isaiah.] 

t  [The  inconsistency  of  the  author's  position  here  is  palpable,  if  we  correctly  apprehend  his  somewhat  involvej  state- 
ment of  it.  The  Revelation  of  St.  John,  if  not  the  apostle's,  if  of  course  under  a  fictitious  name,  and  the  11th  chaptei 
if  Daniel,  if  not  that  prophet's,  is  equally  pseudonymical,  whoever  may  be  conceived  as  the  int.  -polator.  The  distlnotloa 
OB  this  reei-ect  betw-een  a  whole  work  and  a  part  only  ifi  too  nice  to  esctipe  the  odium  of  a  **piou£  fraud."] 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Daniel  to  the  apocryphal  and  pseudepiifraphical  apocalj-pses.  ^Yllicl)  -svere  mainly  framed  on 
its  model,  see  below,  §  11.* 

Note  3. — With  respect  to  the  Chaldaic  idiom  in  Dan.  ii.-vii.,  wliich  we  represented  above 
as  a  principal  reason  for  leading  the  fiamers  of  tlie  canon  to  assign  to  Daniel  a  place  anions 
the  Hagiographa,  and  in  the  immediate  neighloorliood  of  Ezra,  we  remark  in  general,  (1.)  that 
this  dialect,  wiiich  gradually  l)ecame  the  current  language  of  tlie  Palestinian  Jews,  was  the 
eastern-Arama-an  or  Babylonian,  a  purely  Shemitic  idiom,  which,  as  the  ivrpiilar  tongue  of 
the  Babylonians,  must  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  C^~r3  "i"'.!';,  mentioned  in  Dan.  i. 
4,  the  latter  l)eing  the  cmiH  language  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  the  Chalda?an  dynasty,  and 
comi>rehending  numerous  Aryan  or  Turanian  elements.  This  follows  from  Dan.  ii.  4  :  Isa. 
xxxvi.  11  ;  and  Ezra  iv.  7,  where  documents  and  speeches  in  this  dialect  are  designated  a3 
such  by  the  term  tT'O'^S  (Luther  [and  English  version]:  "  Syriac,"  rather ^i/'o/naicj,  while  the 
"tongue  of  the  Chaldeans"  (DiTC3  b)  mentioned  in  Dan.  i.  4  is  not  again  referred  to,  and 
is  clearly  distinguished  from  the  ordinai-y  Aramcean  language  as  a  peculiar  dialect,  cunent 
among  the  warrior  and  priestly  caste  then  dominant  in  Babylon  (possibly  identical  with  those 
perpetuated  in  the  Assyrio-Babylonish  cuneiform  inscriptions)  by  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
there  introduced  ;  for  Daniel  and  his  conii)anions  would  hardly  haveljeeu  obliged  to  undergo 
a  regular  course  of  instruction  in  the  common  Aramaean  or  Bal)ylonian  language,  as  it  should 
be  called,  instead  of  Chaldee,  which  is  less  exact.  Compare  Ijelow,  on  chapter  i.  4.  (2.) 
The  Aramaean  of  chapters  ii.-vii.  includes  numerous  Heliraisms,  as  the  Hel)rew  of  the  remain- 
ing chapters  Clialdaizes  many  expressions ;  a  circumstance  tliat  can  hardly  lie  explained, 
except  on  the  supposition  of  an  intermingling  of  both  dialects  in  the  popular  language,  which 
may  have  l:)egun  at  the  time  of  the  frequent  Assyrian  invasions,  at  iirst  among  the  ten  tribes, 
and  later  gradually  extended  also  to  Judali,  and  to  which  the  strongly  Aramaizing  Hebrew 
of  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  most  intimately  related  to  the  Hebrew  of  Daniel,  bears  testimonj'. 
(3.)  The  co-existence  of  the  Hebrew  and  Arama?an,  as  dialects  spoken  and  understood  by  the 
people,  is  substantiated  further  by  the  circumstance  that  our  author  could  venture  to  express 
most  of  his  narratives  and  predictions  in  tlie  latter  tongue ;  a  feature  that  is  i'e]jeated  only  in 
the  book  of  Ezra,  which  was  written  a  centurv  later,  wliile  Isaiah  (nearly  two  hundred  years 
before  Daniel)  admits  no  Aramaic  expressions  into  his  text  in  a  passage  which  would  havR 
afforded  a  suitable  opportunity  (chap.  xxx\a.  11  ;  cf.  2  Kings  xviii.  26j,  and  even  Jeremiah 
contents  himself  with  employing  a  brief  Aramaic  sentence  (Jer.  x.  11  ;  compare  the  use  of 
single  words  iii  Aram,  in  earlier  books,  e.g.,  Gen.  xxxi.  47;  2  Kings  v.  12).  (4.)  The 
Aramaic  idiom  of  Daniel  corresponds  closely  to  that  of  the  book  of  Ezra  and  of  Jer.  x.  11, 
both  in  its  grammatical  and  its  lexical  features.  Its  wealth  of  older  words  {e.g.,  rr^C-itd 
instead  of  the  later  nCE,  ^nib:;  for  the  later  "iss'b?,  "'nirinp,  for  the  later  K"i.^,  CSEi  t^b 
for  the  later  l^pB,  ■'■n-bsp'iB,  for  the  later  "]?  b?  ''^S,  ^bi:  for  ~v^~"?i<,  etc.)  and  its  general 
grammatical  peculiarities  (where  the  forms,  llib,  12b,  instead  of  the  ajipareutly  more  ancient 
CnD,  t:3,  which  are  found  in  Ezra,  form  the  only  exceptions)  create  the  impression  of  a 
much  higher  antiquity  than  is  represented  by  the  otherwise  closely  related  Chaldee  of  the 
Targums.  which  were  composed  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  a!ra.  (.5.)  Of  the 
seven  notorious  Pareeeisms,  or  words  derived  from  the  Persian,  which  are  found  in  tli« 
Aramaic  portion  of  our  book,  only  '<7.'?'  occurs  in  the  Targums,  while  it  has  two  others  (C3r;!? 
and  niTpri";!)  in  common  with  the  Chaldaizing  Hebrew  of  the  book  of  Esther  and  the  Chaldeei 
of  Ezra,  and  a  fourth  (^?^3)  occurs  at  least  in  the  Chald.  Ezra.  There  is  thus  in  this  respect 
also  a  more  remarkable  lingual  relationshij)  between  Daniel  and  Ezra,  than  l)etwcen  them  and 
the  Clialdee  Targums,  and  the  jjosition  assigned  to  our  book  between  Esther  and  Ezra  on  tlm 
forming  of  the  canon,  is  fully  justified  by  this  consideration.  We  shall  endeavor  to  show,  iu 
connection  with  the  question  of  genuineness,  that  the  weight  of  these  lingual  peculiarities, 
which  point  so  decisively  to  the  composition  of  this  hook  cluring  the  period  immediately  ])re- 
ceding  and  following  the  captivity,  is  in  no  wise  diminished  by  the  occurrence  in  its  Chaldee 
text  of  several  phrases  evidently  derived  from  the  Greek.  We  were  only  concerned  in  this 
connection,  to  show  tliat  the  lingual  peculiarities  of  the  book  formed  a  principal  motive  for 
its  collocation  witli  tlie  Hagiographa,  instead  of  its  lieing  placed  in  the  series  of  prophetical 
books.  Compare  Hengsteiil)erg,  Die  Avthfiitie  des  Daniel,  etc..  ]).  297  scj.  ;  Havernick,  Ein- 
leilung  ins  A.  T.,  II.  2,  482  et  seq. ;  Ziindel,  Kritisclte  Unterauckuugen  iilier  ilie  Ahfassungszeit 

•  [Anbcrlen  (Daniel  and  Revelatton,  Clarke's  ed..  p.  77  eq.)  notices  several  other  "materialistic  rtiffcrences  between  the 
Apocalypse  of  the  CM  nnd  of  the  New  Testament,"'  Rowing  more  or  less  directly  out  of  the  dilTereiit  position  occupied  bj 
the  people  of  God  at  their  respective  times.  Tho.se  who  have  insisted  that  the  Antichrist  of  llie  one  is  necessarily  the 
Antichrist  cf  the  other,  have  therefore  interpreted  the  symbols  as  having  precisely  the  same  significauce,  have  undulj 
9T«rlooked  these  differences  in  the  standpoint  and  design  of  the  two  prophet&l 


PERSONAL  RELATION'S  OF  THE  PROPHET. 


des  Buelies  Danid,  p.  239  et  seq.  Concerning  its  place  after  Esther  and  Ijoforc  Ezra,  compare 
in  addition,  Delitzscli,  Art.  "  Daniel,"  in  Herzog's  Uml-EncycJ.,  III.  273  :  "  The  Ijook  of  Daniel 
stands  between  Esther  and  Ezra.  l)ecanse  Esther,  for  a  sufficient  reason,  is  the  last  ot  the  five 
Megilloth  (festival  volinnes),  and  because  the  yrincqinl  contents  iif  Daniel  helonf/  to  tlie  time 
before  Ezra  and  Xeliemiali."  zVccordingly,  this  Ijook  was  regarded  as  belonging  among  the 
historical  Hagiograplui  (in  view  of  its  really  historical  character  throughout  the  first  half), 
and  it  was  placed  at  the  head  of  these  books,  because  of  its  lingual  relationship  with  Ezra, 
and  also  because  of  its  pre-eminently  holy  and  inspired  character.  This  arrangement  is  not 
chronological,  indeed,  for  in  this  respect  the  Chronicles  should  precede,  and  Daniel,  Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  and  Esther  follow  in  their  order.  But  considerations  of  a  diffei'cnt  natiu'e  pre- 
vailed, on  the  whole,  in  the  collocation  of  these  final  constituents  of  the  Old-Testament  canon. 
The  following  section  will  illustrate  one  of  the  leading  considerations  which  enable  us 
definitely  to  understand  the  jjositiou  of  this  book,  in  connection  with  its  remarks  on  the  call 
of  Daniel  to  the  ijrophetic  office. 

§  2.  The  PEnsoN.\L  Rel.\tions  op  the  Prophet. 

The  name  Daniel  (is':~,  cha]).  i.  6;  also  defective. ixJT  in  Ezek.  xiv.  14.  20;  xsviii.  31, 
which  signifies  '•  judge  of  God,  judge  who  pronounces  judgment  in  the  name  of  God,"  * 
belongs  to  two  persons  besides  our  prophet  in  Old-Testament  history,  of  whom  one  was  a  son 
of  David  (1  Chron.  iii.  1),  and  the  other  a  Levite  of  the  house  of  Ithamar.  The  latter  flour 
ished  but  little  later  than  our  proi)het,  according  to  Ezra  viii.  2 ;  Neh.  x.  7,  and  has,  on  that, 
account,  been  identified  with  him  by  the  Septuagint  in  the  ajjocryjihal  additions  to  the  book 
of  Daniel,  as  well  as  by  several  recent  critics.  The  difference  in  time  is,  however,  too  con- 
siderable to  admit  of  this  oi)iniou  ;  and  the  fact  that  among  the  contemporaries  of  the  priest 
Daniel  were  found  a  Mishael  (Keh.  viii.  4),  Hauaniah.  and  Azariah  (Neh.  x.  3,  24),  must  be 
regarded  as  a  mere  accident,  from  which,  in  view  of  the  notorious  frequency  of  these  names, 
the  conclusion  cannot  be  drawn,  that  the  Daniel  of  our  book,  together  with  his  three  pious 
associates,  arc  the  creatui'es  of  a  fictitious  collocation  and  ijre-dating  of  those  persons,  who 
lived  almost  a  century  later  (compare  the  arguments  against  Bleek  in  note  1). 

According  to  chapter  i.  3,  Daniel  seems  to  have  been  of  royal  descent,  and  thci-eforc  born 
at  Jerusalem.  The  passage  in  chapter  ix.  24,  however,  will  hardly  serve  in  proof  of  this 
(Ilarenl)erg  and  other  cxpositore),  since  .lerutalem  nnght  have  been  termed  the  "  holy  city  " 
by  Daniel,  even  if  he  belonged  to  any  other  city  or  tribe  of  the  holy  land,  f  He  was,  at  any 
rate,  af  high  birth,  and,  together  with  three  other  noble  Jewish  youths,  was  in  early  life 
transported  to  Babylon  in  the  first  deportation  under  Jehoiakira,  in  order  to  become  a  page 
at  the  Chalda^un  court.  J  Here  their  Hebrew  names  were  changed  for  others  of  Chaldsean  origin, 
and  Hananiah  received  the  name  of  Shadrach,  Jlishacl  that  of  Jleshach,  and  Azariali  that  of 
Aljednego,  while  Daniel  was  known  as  Belteshazzar  ("^KHKCZa).  This  name,  if  exi)lained 
solely  according  to  the  Shemitic  analogy,  seems  to  be  synonymous  with  "  Beli  princcps."  or 
'■  princeps,  ciii  Belus  favet  "("iHwia),  and  therefore  likewise  indicates  the  princely  rank  of 
Daniel.  Tliat  he  bore  in  addition  the  probably  Persian  name  of  Sheshhazzai;  by  which 
Zcrubliabel  was  known  at  the  court  of  Cyrus  (Ezra  i.  8),  rests  on  an  unsupported  Rabbinical 
tradition,  which  is  found  in  Rashi  and  several  later  writers,  and  which  seems  to  Inive  grown 
out  of  a  false  etymological  interpretation  of  -^-^z'Si'Z  as  =  "who  was  in  six-fold  tribu- 
lati(ra." 

Tlie  instruction  in  the  wisdom  of  the  Chaldee  magians  and  in  the  manners  of  the  court, 
which  Daniel  received  in  Babylon  under  the  supervision  of  the  chief  eunuch,  Ashpcnaz,  did 

*  So  Gesenius  and  Dietrich,  in  the  Hamlwurterb 'icli ^  explain,  in  connection  with  many  older  expositors,  while  FflrsI 
interprets  the  name  by  '■  jutlge  through  God."  and  a  majority  render  it  "  God  is  my  jadge"  (e.f?.,  Hiivemick,  with  refer- 
ence to  Gen.  XXX.  fi).  or  also,  '■  God  is  judge  "  (c.ff.,  ileinke,  Die  messianischen  Weixmfftijigen,  etc.,  iv.  1,  1(37). 

t  The  Jewish  tradition  found  in  Tseudo-Epiphanius,  De  vtt.  propliet.^  c.  10,  which  locates  the  birth-place  of  Daniel 
cf  BeflePoptu  Tfl  ai'ttiTipa  iT^rjaiov  lepouiraA^^,  or.  by  another  reading  (preferred  by  Relnnd,  Palaest.^  p.  <J94j.  it 
Bedepwv  Tfj  avitiTepa,  is  of  no  historical  vaUio,  and  perhaps  originated  in  the  desire  to  place  the  birth  of  the  prophft,  who. 
on  the  authority  of  Ezra.  viii.  2,  was  held  to  be  a  Levite,  in  a  Lcvitical  city  (see  Josh.  xxi.  22). 

X  ["The  history  of  that  period,  in  Kings  and  Chronicles,  seems  to  warrant  the  supposition  that  the  Jewish  lads  in  que* 
lior.  were  liostagnf!,  who  were  drawn  from  the  upper  classes  of  society  at  Jerusalem,  in  order  to  secure  the  quiet  and  sub 
mission  of  th    Jewish  king  and  his  nobles  in  their  tributary  condition." — StWM'C] 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


not  prevent  him  from  observing  the  injunctions  of  the  Mosaic  law  in  regard  to  food  an^ 
drink,  with  conscientious  care,  and  from  astonishing  the  officials  who  had  him  in  charge  by  the 
almost  miraculous  eifects  produced  in  his  appearance  through  this  ascetic  course,  in  which  hi) 
three  friends  [participated  (chap.  i.  8-1  Oj.  But  marked  as  were  these  eifects  of  his  piety,  his 
fame  was  increased  still  further  by  the  extraordinary  proofs  of  his  piudence,  wisdom,  and 
learning,  which  he  manifested  at  an  early  period,  especially  in  the  interpretation  of  dreams, 
visions,  etc.  This  extended  his  reputation  beyond  the  bounds  of  Babylon  before  he  had 
attained  maturity,  and  must  even  have  made  his  name  proverbial  among  liis  countrymen  at 
least,  as  designating  a  marvel  of  wisdom.  *  Only  thus  can  we  explain  the  fact  that  Ezekiel, 
his  contemporary,  although  consideral)ly  older  in  years,  refers  to  Daniel  in  several  passages 
of  his  prophecies  (which  were  brought  to  a  close  in  B.  C.  572,  that  is,  about  the  middle  of  the 
captivity),  as  a  model  of  pious  wisdom,  and  in  two  instances  classes  him  with  Noah  and  Job, 
the  great  wise  men  of  antiquity  (Ezek.  xiv.  14,  38  ;  xxviii.  3  ;  compare  note  2). 

That  Daniel  was  not  merely  trained  under  the  oversight  of  the  chief  eunuch,  or  chief  palace 
official  ("prince  of  the  eunuchs")  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  but  also  himself  became  a  eunuch  in 
the  proper  sense,  and  was  trained  in  tliat  capacity,  is  an  ancient  Jewish  tradition,  which 
appears  to  rest  on  a  combination  of  Dan.  i.  3  et  seq.  with  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  to  Hezekiah 
(Isa.  xxxix.  7.  where  ;-o^nc  ■"'"*  held  to  designate  actual  eunuchs).  It  is,  however,  without 
any  historical  sujiport,  either  in  the  book  of  Daniel  itself,  or  in  other  Old-Testament  records; 
and  Ezek.  xiv.  20  seems  even  to  directly  contradict  this  tradition,  since  it  ascribes  sous  and 
daughters  to  him,  as  it  does  also  to  Noah  and  Jolj.  But  it  could  not  be  otlierwise  than  wel- 
come to  the  asceticaUy  disposed  Jews  of  later  times,  as  well  as  to  many  church  fathers  and 
Roman  Catholic  expositors,  to  discover  in  Daniel  a  eunuch,  even  though  an  involuntary  one, 
and  an  example  of  pei'petual  virginity.  Hence  the  Targums  report  this  tradition  (on  Esther 
iv.  5,  in  connection  with  the  mention  of  Hatach,  the  Persian  eunuch  wlio  was  appointed  to 
serve  Esther),  as  do  others  of  the  more  ancient  rabbins  (Pseudo-Epiphanius,  Vitte  PropJiet.,  c. 
10,  ijv  dvrjf)  (Tilj(ppwv  Cj(TT€  dnKftv  Tous  *Iovfiaious  flvtii  aTrdbotrrti).  Of  later  ral^bins,  €.g.,  Rashi  ad 
Dan.  i.  21  (liut  not  Ibn-Ezra,  ad  Dan.  i.  3) ;  of  cliurcli  fathers,  Origen  {Horn.  iv.  in  Ezech. ), 
Jerome  {Ade.  Jovin.  i.  1  ;  C'omin.  in  Jes.  xxxix.  7  ;  in  Dan.  i.  3),  Jolm  Damascenus  (De  fide 
orthod.  iv.  25) ;  of  later  Roman  Catholics,  Cornelius  ii  Lapide,  Huetius.  and  otliers,  hold  to 
tliis  tradition.  [It  is  also  strongly  confirmed  by  the  well-knoT\Ti  usages  of  Oi-iental  courts,  in 
which  eunuchs  are  admitted  to  privileges  allowed  to  none  others,  especially  in  jjersonal  offices 
near  the  king.  Haman,  indeed,  A-as  not  of  this  class  in  the  book  of  Ezra,  but  Nehemiah  was 
doubtless  such  in  the  Persian  court.  In  the  light  of  this  circumstance,  the  dietetic  regimen 
imposed  upon  Daniel  and  his  three  companions  had  a  sanitary  reason,  and  their  voluntary 
temperance  may  actually  have  had  a  good  effect  during  their  period  of  convalescence  after 
the  operation.  The  reference  to  Daniel  in  Ezekiel  does  not  so  explicitly  allude  to  children  as 
to  invalidate  this  conclusion,  being  merely  an  implication  of  kindred.] 

After  three  years  of  training  and  instruction,  in  wliich  early  period  tlie  apocryplial  narrative 
in  the  interpolated  Daniel  of  the  Septuaginl  places  the  celebrated  decision  in  favor  of 
Susannah,  who  was  unjustly  condemned  to  death,  as  an  instance  of  the  extraordinary  wisdom 
of  the  youtlilul  prophet,  Daniel  and  his  three  companions  entered  on  their  duties  at  the  court 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  t    Through  the  miraculous  aid  of  the  enlightening  grace  of  God,  he  was 

*  [''The  reader  will  recall  some  points  of  close  analogy  between  Daniel  and  Joseph,  Both  were  captives ;  each  lose  in 
n  foreign  kingdom  to  the  same  rank  of  prime  minister,  by  the  same  qualities  of  personal  character — sterling  integrity, 
nnselfirth  devotion  to  their  work,  great  business  capacity,  and  unfaltering  faith  in  God.  Each  became,  under  God .  a  patrou 
and  protector  to  liis  snfTenng  people.  To  each  was  given  of  God  extraordinary  prophetic  powers,  which  served  to  raise 
him  to  general  notice  and  confidence,  and  manifestly  in  the  case  of  Daniel,  served  to  exalt  the  God  of  the  Hebrew  race 
highly  ili  the  convictions  of  the  monarchs  under  whom  he  sen'ed.  Each  was  able  to  distance  and  confound  all  the  pr& 
tenders  to  snpeniatnral  knowledge,  of  whom  there  were  many  both  in  Egypt  and  Babylon." — Cotctrs.] 

t  ["  This  custom  of  taking  young  men  of  the  finest  parts  from  a  captive  or  subject  race  to  fill  responsible  positions  abont 
the  king  has  prevailed  in  many  desjxjtic  governments,  and  is  essentially  the  usage  of  the  Turkish  empire  to  this  day.  It 
finds  its  motives  (1.)  In  the  fact  that  such  monarchs  need  men  about  them  of  the  very  first  abilities  :  l2.)  In  the  diiflcuity 
they  wonld  eTperience  in  getting  young  men  of  such  ability  among  their  own  people,  who  might  not,  by  virtue  of  tteir 
(ocial  position  or  cjr.nections,  become  dangerous  to  the  throne." — CowUJt,] 


PERSONAL  RELATIONS  OF  THE  PROPHET. 


enabled  to  interpret  a  remarkable  dream  of  the  king,  in  consequence  of  which  he  was  pro- 
moted to  the  royal  favor,  as  was  Joseph  at  the  court  of  Pharaoh,  until  he  became  the  most 
influential  official  in  the  province  of  Babylonia,  and  chief  of  the  caste  of  magians  (chap.  ii. 
48  et  seq. ).  He  appears  to  have  occupied  this  important  position  until  the  close  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's reign,  although  the  narrative  of  the  persecution  of  Daniel's  friends  and  fellow- 
worshippers,  contained  in  chap,  iii.,  and  that  of  his  interjiretatiou  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
second  dream  and  of  the  madness  of  that  king,  which  is  found  in  chap,  iv.,  warrant  the 
opinion  that  his  glory  was  not  without  an  occasional  Ijut  transitory  eclipse  in  tlie  course  of 
that  protracted  jieriod. 

Under  Belshazzar.  the  son  and  (possibly  not  immediate,  but  rather  third  or  fourth)  successor 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  Paniel  regained  the  royal  favor  and  influential  position  of  which  he  had 
been  temporarily  deprived.  After  having  been  entirely  forgotten,  he  succeeded  in  interpret- 
ing an  extraordmary  appearance  whieli  had  alarmed  the  king,  but  the  prophetic  meaning  ol 
which,  relating  to  his  approaching  overthrow  by  the  Persian  world-power,  none  of  th« 
magians  were  able  to  reveal.  The  great  honors  with  which  Belshazzar  rewarded  him  imme- 
diately before  his  fall  (enrobing  in  purple,  placing  a  chain  of  gold  about  his  neck,  and 
proclaiming  him  the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom)  remained  to  liini  under  the  first  Medo- 
Persian  ruler,  Darius  the  Mede  (Cyaxeres).  This  monarch  appointed  him  one  of  the  three 
princes  who  were  placed  over  all  the  one  hundred  and  twenty  governors  of  his  kingdom  ; 
and  he  even  thought  to  place  him  over  his  whole  realm  (as  minister  of  state  or  grand-vizier) 
chap.  vi.  1-4.  For  this  reason,  the  other  princes  and  governors,  moved  with  envy,  sought  to 
destroy  Daniel  by  bringing  his  steadfast  adherence  to  the  faith  of  his  fathei's  into  conflict 
with  the  established  religion  of  Pereia,  or  rather  with  an  extraordinary  decree  of  the  king, 
which  provided  that  during  the  space  of  one  month  the  honor  of  Divine  worship  should  be 
rendered  only  to  him,  the  ruler  of  the  kingdom.  As  Daniel  pei-sisted  in  the  regular  discharge 
of  his  religious  duties,  and,  according  to  the  custom  of  jjious  Jews,  offered  prayer  at  an  open 
window,  and  witli  his  face  turned  toward  Jerusalem,  three  times  in  each  day,  he  became 
subject  to  the  fearful  penalty  imposed  by  the  king,  of  being  devoured  by  lions.  The 
wondrous  care  of  God,  however,  preseiwed  him  unharmed  through  the  night  which  he  spent 
in  their  den,  and,  in  consequence,  he  rose  still  higher  in  the  favor  of  the  king,  while  his 
accusers  were  thrown  into  the  den,  and  perished  by  the  deatli  they  had  designed  for  him. 
'U'hen  Cyrus  assumed  the  sole  government  over  the  Medo-Persian  world-kingdom,  after  the 
two  years'  reign  of  Darius  the  Mede,  the  dignities  and  honors  of  Daniel  were  continued  to 
him.  He  therefore  survived  tlie  expiration  of  the  Babylonian  Captivity  and  the  beginning 
of  Israel's  return  to  the  holy  land  (see  chap.  i.  21),  which  ensued  on  the  accession  of  that 
king,  "the  anointed  of  the  Lord"  (Tsa.  xlv.  1);  and  although  the  book  of  his  prophecies 
recorde  nothing  of  his  agency  in  restoring  his  people  to  their  Land,  his  indirect  influence  was 
probably  not  unimportant.  The  closing  series  of  his  prophecies  (chap,  s.-xii.),  which  disclose 
the  future  history  of  Israel  down  to  the  erection  of  Messiah's  kingdom  on  the  ruins  of 
tlie  world-powers,  testify  that  in  spirit  he  cherished  a  warm  symjiathy  for  the  physical  and 
moral  welfare  of  his  people. 

He  died  probably  soon  after  receiving  and  recording  these  final  revelations,  which  he 
himself  places  in  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  Cyrus;  but  when,  and  under  what  circum- 
stances, his  death  occurred  is  unknown.  The  attempts  to  state  his  circumstances  at  the  close 
of  life,  together  with  the  time  and  manner  of  his  death,  which  are  found  in  Jewish  and 
Arabic  authors,  and  also  in  church  fathers,  are  based  on  empty  traditions  whicli  are  wholly 
without  support.  We  class  among  these  the  statement  of  Josephus  {Antiq.  Jud:  x.  11,  7)  that 
Daniel  immortalized  himself  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Darius  the  Mede  by  building  a  splendid 
royal  castle  of  marble  at  Bcbatana,  which  was  still  standing  and  in  the  charge  of  a  Jewish  priest 
in  the  rime  of  Josephus ;  *  also  the  Jewish-oriental  legend,  perhaps  derived  from  Dan.  i.  21, 
and  Ezra  viii.  2,  concerning  his  return  to  Palestine  among  the  first  exiles  under  Zerubbabel 
(D'Herbelot.  Bthl.  Orient.,  p.  283) ;  further,  the  statement  of  Pseudo-Epiphanius,  that  he  died 

•  Cf.  Jerome,  Comment,  in  Dan.  viii,  2,  where  the  erection  of  this  palace  iB  erroneously  transferred  to  Stua. 


10  IKTRODTTCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DiNIEL. 


at  Babvlon  and  was  buried  in  the  royal  tomb  ;  the  statement,  perhaps,  of  later  origin,  but 
more  widely  circulated  than  the  one  last  mentioned,  which  is  held  by  Abdul-faraj  and  Benj. 
of  Tudela.  that  he  died  in  Shushan — a  tradition  ujion  which  rests  the  still  practised  adoration 
of  the  reputed  tomb  of  the  projihet  in  that  city,  in  which  Jews  and  Christians  are  said  to  par 
ticipate,  as  well  as  Moslems  (see  Ausland,  1853,  p.  960)  ;  and  finally  the  Romish  tradition, 
w'hich  is  to  the  effect  that  Daniel  died  as  a  martyr,  and  which  commemorates  him  on  the  21st 
of  July  (cf.  Stadler  and  Heim,  Vollst.  IleiUgen-Lexikon,  vol.  i.,  p.  722  ss.). 

The  above  historical  notices  concerning  Daniel  show,  that  by  reason  of  his  relation?  to  the 
Babylonian,  and  later  to  the  Medo-Persian  dynasties,  as  well  as  on  account  of  his  growth  to 
maturity  and  continued  dwelling  and  labors  in  a  foreign  land,  he  occupies  an  entirely  excep- 
tional position  among  the  Old-Testament  prophets — a  position  that  makes  it  seem  really 
doubtful  whether  the  prophetic  office  was  his  proper  and  chief  vocation.  In  any  case,  he 
appears  as  much  a  Chaldiean  wise  man  as  an  Israelitish  prophet,  and  thus  intervenes  between 
the  Old-Testament  prophetism  and  the  position  of  the  Divinely  enlightened  seers  among  the 
nations  that  bordered  on  Israel,  who  were  supematurally  chosen  to  l)e  the  beard's  of  Messianic 
I)rophecies,  as  in  the  case  of  Balaam  in  the  time  of  Sloses,  and  the  Eastern  magi  on  the 
threshold  of  New-Testament  times.  For  this  reason  chiefly,  it  would  seem,  he  was  regarded 
by  the  framers  of  the  canon  as  not  belonging  to  the  class  of  prophets  in  the  narrower  sense, 
but  as  more  directly  included  among  the  writers  of  the  Hagiographa  (compare  note  3). 

KoTE  1. — Bleek,  in  EinUitung  ins  A.  Test,  2d  ed.,  p.  610,  remarks  with  reference  to  the 
persons  mentioned  in  Ezra  viii.  2,  and  Neh.  viii.  4  ;  x.  3,  7,  24,  under  the  names  of  Daniel, 
Mishael,  Hananiah,  and  Azariah :  "  This  coincidence  of  names  with  those  of  the  heroic 
believers  represented  in  our  book  may  be  accidental,  but  nevertheless  is  remarkable,  since  it 
exists  -n-ith  reference  to  the  entire  four,  and  the  names  Daniel  and  Mishael  occur  but  rarely 
elsewhere.  The  time,  indeed,  in  which  the  four  contemporaries  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  flour- 
ished is  later  than  that  of  Daniel  and  his  friends,  as  about  160  years  elapsed  between  the 
third  year  of  Jehoiakim  and  the  reading  of  the  book  of  the  law  by  Ezra;  but  still,  it  is  not 
unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  composer  of  this  book  (who,  according  to  Bleek,  lived  and 
wrote  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  about  B.  C.  167)  borrowed  the  names  of  his  faithful 
heroes  from  those  four  men.  We  cannot  tell  whether  a  more  intimate  acquaintance  with  their 
history  and  experience  in  Babylon  led  him  to  select  their  names."  (Similarly  De  Wette, 
Einleitunij  ins  A.  T.,  p.  360  et  seq.)  To  us  the  supposition  of  Bleek  seems  about  as  vague  a 
combination  as  the  familiar  attempts  of  Strauss  to  find  in  the  names  of  Gospel  history,  Jacob, 
Joseph,  Mary,  and  Elizabeth,  mythical  reproductions  of  the  corresponding  names  in  the 
primitive  Scripture  history,  or  to  find  the  origin  of  the  historical  Lazarus  in  the  Gospel  of  St. 
John,  in  the  purely  imaginary  person  of  this  name  in  the  parabolical  narrative  found  in  Luke 
xvi,  19  et  .seq.  [Lehen  Jesu,  etc.,  1864,  p.  477  et  seq.).  The  impossibility  of  identifying  the 
four  ctmtemporaries  of  Ezra  with  our  prophet  and  his  friends  appears  from  (1)  the  fact  that, 
according  to  Dan.  i.  31,  which  passage  could  not  possibly  have  been  known  to  the  mythical 
writer,  Daniel  lived  only  to  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Cyrus;  (2)  that  the  names  Azariah, 
Daniel,  and  Hananiah,  which  are  enumerated  in  Neh.  x.  2-28,  among  the  great  numl)er  of 
names  of  leaders,  priests,  and  Levitcs,  who  engaged  to  observe  the  law,  became  so  unimpor- 
tant and  are  so  widely  separated  that  only  the  most  reckless  arbitrariness  or  chance  could 
associate  them  precisely  as  intimate  companions,  who  filled  a  distinguished  position  at  the 
royal  court  of  Babylon  as  wise  men  and  confessors ;  (3)  that  the  name  Mishael  (Neh.  viii.  4), 
in  the  list  of  those  who  stood  on  the  left  hand  of  Ezra  while  he  read  the  law,  occupies  a  nc 
less  isolated  position  ;  (4)  that  the  identity  of  Daniel,  of  the  sons  of  Ithamar,  who  is  men- 
tioned in  Ezra  viii.  2,  with  the  ])riest  or  Levite  of  the  same  name,  who  is  noticed  in  Neh.  x. 
7,  is,  at  any  rate,  extremely  doulitful,  since  their  surroundings  are  wholly  dissimilar;  (.5j  that 
what  is  recorded  in  chaps,  i.  and  iii.,  particularly  the  report  concerning  the  Baliylonian 
names  conferred  on  them  (chap.  i.  7)  bears  too  thoroughly  the  stamp  of  historical  reminis- 
cence to  admit  of  the  hypothesis  of  a  later  invention,  for  the  purpose  of  exalting  those 
obscure  names,  which  were  almost  forgotten  among  the  number  of  names  in  the  book  of 
Nehemiah. 

Note  2. — Tlie  three- fold  reference  of  Ezekiel  to  Daniel  has  been  regarded  by  many  modern 
critics  as  irreconcilable  with  the  historical  existence  of  a  magian  and  prophet  of  this  name, 
since  in  two  instances  (chap.  xiv.  14,  20)  Ezekiel  places  Daniel  ))etween  Noah  and  Job,  and 
since  he  clearly  seems  to  treat  him  as  a  personage  belonging  to  the  earliest  antiquity  in 
those  ])assages  as  well  as  in  cliap.  xxviii.  3.  On  this  account,  they  have  either  questioned  the 
genuineness  of  these  passages  in  Ezekiel  {e.g.,  Bernstein,  in  Tzschinier's  Aiialelten,  i.  3,  p. 
10),  or   given   up   the   historical   character  of  the   exilian   Daniel,   and  considered  him  a 


PERSONAL  RELATIONS  OF  THE  PROPHET.  11 

purely  poetic  invention  like  Job,  or  a  wise  man  belonging  to  the  patriarchal  or  primi- 
tive period  of  Israelitisli  history.  The  latter  hypothesis  especially  has  been  received 
with  favor,  and  has  Ijeen  variously  developed  by  Bleek,  Hitzig,  Ewakl,  and  Bunsen. 
According  tj  Bleek  (in  Sclileierm.  u.  Liicke's  Theolog tucker  Zeitschri/t,  III.  1822,  p.  283  et 
seq.,  and  in  Einl.  ins  A.  T.,  p.  608  et  seq.),  we  are  not  led  by  the  manner  in  which 
he  is  mentioned  to  think  of  a  person  who  shared  in  the  Babylonian  captivity  with 
Ezekiel,  but  much  rather,  to  conceive  of  a  long-familiar  personage  of  primitive  times, 
who  was  historically  connected  with  events  in  the  experience  of  Israel,  or,  which  is  more 
probable,  since  we  know  no  more  concerning  him,  who  was  like  Job,  a  mere  product  of 
the  poetic  fancy.  From  the  manner  in  which  Ezekiel  refers  to  him,  it  is  barely  con- 
ceivable that  he  should  have  been,  as  the  Daniel  of  our  book  is  represented,  a  Jewish 
exile  and  contemporary  with  Ezekiel."  De  Wette  {Einl.  ins  A.  T.,  p.  361)  and  Von 
Lengerke  (Das  Buck  Daniel  ausgel.,  p.  xciii.  et  seq.)  likewise  limit  the  choice  to  either  a 
"  man  belonging  to  the  gray  antiquity"  or  to  a  purely  imaginary  personage.  Hitzig,  on  the 
other  hand,  regards  tlie  Daniel  of  Ezek.  xiv.  as  not,  indeed,  created  by  the  writer,  like  Job, 
but  still  as  the  '■  child  of  tradition  "  like  Noah  and  !Melchizedck,  and  finds  an  intimate  cor- 
respondence, amounting  almost  to  identity,  of  our  Daniel  with  the  mysterious  royal  and 
priestly  personage  of  the  latter,  who  is  assumed  to  be  a  junior  contemporary  of  Noah — a 
relation  which  exists  especially  in  respect  of  his  name  {  Jki:i,  "  divine  judge,"  nearly  synony- 
m9us  witli  piili;;?:,  '•  king  of  righteousness."  KurzgeJ'.  exeget.  Handbuch  zu  Daniel,  p.  viii.). 
Ewald,  again  (Die  Pnpheten  des  Alien  Bundes.  vol.  il..  Appendix,  p.  562  et  seq),  considers 
the  Daniel  mentioned  by  Ezekiel  as  having  Ijeen  descended  from  one  of  the  ten  tribes,  and 
as  liaviug  lived  and  proijhesied  at  the  heathen  court  of  Nineveh,  a  hundred  years  before  the 
Babylonian  Captivity.  To  this  particijiator  in  the  Assyrian  captivity  were  attril;uted  pro- 
phetic oracles  respecting  the  world-kingdoms,  by  an  unknown  Jewisli  author  of  the  times  of 
Alexander  the  Great  or  the  earliest  Seleucida;,  which  were  modified  by  a  later  writer,  in  the 
time  of  Antiochus  Epipiianes,  from  whom  tliey  received  their  present  form.  liunsen  {Gott  in, 
der  Oeschir/it-',  I.  514  et  seq.)  agrees  in  the  main  with  the  first  part  of  this  hypothesis.  The 
historical  Daniel  lived  at  the  royal  court  in  Nineveh  soon  after  the  deportation  of  the  Israel- 
ites by  Slialmaneser ;  the  fantastic  representations  of  animals  on  the  palaces  of  Nimrud  and 
Khorsabad,  whicli  have  become  known  to  us  through  the  researches  of  Botta  and  Layard, 
-erved  as  models  for  his  visional  descriptions  of  the  world-kingdoms  under  the  form  of 
various  imaginary  animals,  in  cliapters  vii.  and  viii. ;  and  the  originator  of  the  present  book 
transformed  the  prophet  of  Nineveh  by  mistake  into  a  Babylonian.  Compare  below,  §  4, 
tiote  1.  Two  earlier  opponents  of  the  genuineness  of  this  book,  Bertholdt  and  Kirrass, 
endorse  the  opinion  of  Ewald  and  Bunsen,  that  Daniel  was  a  real  person  of  historical  times ; 
but  instead  of  assigning  tliis  wise  man,  wliom  Ezekiel  celebrates,  to  an  earlier  age,  they  make 
him  the  contemporary  of  tliat  propliet,  living  at  the  court  of  Babylon.  The  author  of  this 
book,  who  belonged  to  a  mucli  later  period,  and  derived  his  entire  knowledge  of  Daniel 
from  Ezekiel.  merely  clotlied  him  in  a  mythical  dress,  etc.  (Bertholdt,  Daniel,  etc.,  I.  p.  7; 
Einleit.  ins  A.  T.,  y.  15(J6;  Kirmss,  Commentatio  historico-critica  exhihens  descriptioneni  et 
ei'.nsurdin  recent iortim  de  Daniel  libra  opinionum,  Jen.  1828,  p.  59  et  seq.) ;  in  like  manner 
also  Winer  in  tlie  RealuxJrterb.,  Art.  "Daniel  "  (I.,  p.  247;. 

The  more  recent  defendeis  of  the  genuineness  of  Daniel's  prophecies  are  in  immediate  cor- 
respondence with  the  arguments  raised  l)y  these  latter  critics  in  support  of  tlie  possibility  of 
Oaniers  contemporary  existence  with  Ezekiel,  despite  the  peculiar  manner  in  which  he  is  men- 
tioned in  Ezek.  xiv.  and  xxviii.  Hengstenberg  especially  iDie  Authentic  des  Daniel,  p.  70  et 
*eq.)  shows  in  a  most  discerning  way  that  the  chronological  difficulty  is  of  no  importance, 
tince  Daniel  must  hace  been  thirty  years  uld  when  Ezekiel  xiv.  was  composed,  and  since  the 
rewards  and  honors  conferred  on  him  by  Nebuchadnezzar  must  have  been  receiced  at  least  ten 
years  be/ore  that  period  ;  and  furtlier,  that  the  book  of  Daniel  itself  (in  such  passages  as  chap. 
i.  17,  20;  ii.  47;  iv.  5;  v.  11)  testifies  to  the  extraordinary  and  early-developed  wisdom,  by 
which  this  pious  youth  was  distinguished,  and  with  reference  to  which  Ezekiel  was  already 
enabled  to  point  the  contemporary  king  of  Tyre  to  him  as  a  model  of  exalted  wisdom  and 
Divine  illumination  (chap,  xxviii.  8).  Tlie  position  assigned  to  Daniel  between  Noah  and 
Job  in  chapter  xiv.  14  and  20,  proves  nothing  whatever  concerning  his  patriarchal  age; 
rather.  Joli  is  placed  at  the  end  of  the  series  because  he  was  a  less  suitable  example  for  the 
immediate  purpose  of  Ezekiel,  than  Noah  and  Daniel,  the  preachers  of  righteousness  in  the 
midst  of  a  godless  world.  In  general  agreement  with  this  view  of  Hengstenberg  are, 
Havernick  (Komm.  zu  Ezechiel,  p.  206  et  seq.  ;  Neue  Untersuchungcn  iiber  Daniel,  p.  23  et  seq. ; 
Einl.  ins  A.  T.,  ii.  2.  455),  Kliefoth  {Das  Buck  Ezethiels  ubersetzt  und  erkldrt,  p.  177  et  seq. ; 
and  Das  Buck  Daniels,  \i.  31  et  seq),  Delitzsch  (in  Herzog's  Ucal-Encyli..  s.  v.  Daniel),  and 
Zilndel  (Krit.  Untersuchungcn,  etc.,  p.  258  et  seq.).  These  later  apologists,  however,  justly 
declare  Hengstenberg's  explanation  of  the  circumstance  that  Daniel  is  placed  between  Noah 
and  Jol)  to  lie  inade  juate,  and  therefore  endeavor  to  find  a  more  apijrojjriate  explanation  of 
this  fact,  whieli  at  tlie  first  Uush  seems  so  strange.  Havernick  and  Kliefoth  assume  a  chmax: 
"  Noah  saved  himself  and  his  family;  Daniel  was  still  able  to  provide  for  his  friends,  chap. 


i2  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

ii.  17,  18  ;  Job,  despite  his  uprightness,  could  not  even  save  his  children."  Delitzsch  explains 
'Ate  arrangement  of  names  by  assuming  thatEzekicl  '' mentions  first  a  righteous  man  belonging 
to  the  ancient  world,  next,  a  righteous  man  belonging  to  the  present  world,  and  lastly,  a 
righteous  man  who  belongs  to  tlie  ideal  world  ;  "  for  Job  is  "presented  to  the  eyes  of  Israel 
as  a  righteous  man  only  in  the  book  of  Jolj,  which,  altliougb  not  without  a  historical  basis,  is 
not  historical,  but  rather  poetical  and  didactic."  Finally,  Zundcl  seeks  to  explain  this 
.irrangcment  of  names  by  the  observation,  that  Daniel  occupied  a  "  thoroughly  analogous 
Central  and  universal  position  among  his  contemporaiies,"  so  to  speak,  as  a  mediator  between 
Gc-d  and  His  people,  by  virtue  of  which,  as  formerly  did  Noah  and  Job,  he  presented  his 
ujiriglitness  and  piety  before  God,  in  a  reconciling  and  atoning  way,  when  His  anger  was 
aroused  because  of  the  sins  of  His  people.  None  of  these  attempts  at  explanation  are  entirely 
satisfactory  to  us  ;  but  that  of  Delitzsch  seems  to  be  the  most  adequate  and  plausible,  because 
the  most  simple  and  unconstrained.  But  may  not  euphonic  considerations  have  contributed 
to  the  arrangement  of  the  three  names  n:,  bsf:!  and  21^8,  in  like  manner  as  such  considera- 
tions appear  to  have  j^revailed  in  other  enumerations  of  proper  names  ?  e.  g.,  of  the  three  sons 
of  Noah  (Gen.  vi.  9  ;  ix.  18,  etc.).  among  which  Ham,  although  the  youngest  of  the  three,  is 
always  placed  before  Jajjlieth  ;  of  the  three  daughters  of  Job  (Job  xlii.  14).  etc.  As  examples 
of  the  neglect  of  chronological  order  in  the  enumeration  of  names,  compare,  in  addition, 
Ecdes.,  chap,  xlix.,  where  Josiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Zerubbabel,  Joshua,  and  Nehemiah 
(vs.  16-20)  are  placed  before  Enoch,  Joseph,  Selh,  Sliem,  and  Adam;  also  Heli.  xi.  82 
((Tideon,  Barak,  Samson,  Jephthah,  David,  Samuel) ;  Jude  v.  9  et  seq.  (Moses,  Cain,  Balaam, 
Korah,  Enoch);  Matt.  xvi.  14  (John  the  Baptist.  Elijah,  Jeremiah).  The  last  of  these 
examples  is  especiall}'  instructive,  since  it  shows  that  living  persons  might  be  classed  with 
l>i rsons  of  similar  character  belonging  to  the  earliest  antiquity  without  any  regard  to  chrono- 
lo!.ical  sequence.  [The  fact  that  Daniel  is  thus  associated  by  Ezekiel,  a  nearly  contemporary 
wiiter,  witli  an  undoubtedly  historical  personage,  Noah,  has  alw.ays  been  held  to  be  a  strong 
pi  oof  of  his  actual  existence.  The  same  holds  true  of  Job,  as  mentioned  in  the  same  connec- 
tion. Compare  James  v.  11.  Indeed,  the  introduction  of  a  purely  mythical  name  in  such  a 
matter-of-fact  connection  would  be  irrelevant  and  nugatory.] 

Note  0. — On  the  peculiarity  of  the  ])roplietic  character  of  Daniel,  as  constituting  a  principal 
reason  for  referring  this  Ijook  among  the  Hagiographa,  see  Delitzsch,  p.  272:  "'The  book  of 
Daniel  was  placed  among  the  Hagiograjjlia,  because  he  was  not  a  prophet  hy  virtue  oj' his  offite 
arid  calling,  although,  like  David  and  Solomon,  he  jjossessed  the  gift  of  prophecy."  Origen 
I'emiirks  correctly  :  '"  Non  si  quis  projjhetat,  ideo  propheta  est.  Ac  profecto  si  quis  propheta 
est,  is  quidem  prophetat,  sed  vero  qui  prophetat,  non  continuo  etiam  est  propheta."  The 
genuineness  of  the  book  is  therefore  not  compromised  by  its  position  among  the  Hagiographa.* 
t'ompare  also  Auberlcn,  Daniel,  jj.  30  et  seq.  :  "  We  may  also  refer  to  his  instruction  in  the 
wisdom  of  tlie  Chaldaean  Magi ;  for  the  Holy  Scriptures  show  that  the  mysterious  knowledge 
and  arts  of  the  heathen  were  not  an  empty  boast,  e.  ;;.,  in  the  case  of  the  Egyjjtian  sorcerers 
v.lio  opposed  Moses.  The  wise  men  who  were  led  by  the  star  to  seek  after  the  new-born  king 
of  the  Je\vs,  were  such  Chaldee  Magians,  which  clearly  shows  that  they  were  not  deprived  of 
all  truth,  and  ia  connection  with  which  we  may  even  inquire  whether  a  tradition  may  not  have 
hetn  transmitted  among  them  which  had  enumated  from  Daniel,  their  chief,  who  had  received 
such  remarkaljle  disclosures  concerning  this  king  of  the  Jews,  reaching  even  tf)  the  time  of 
his  appearing  ?  The  circumstance,  that  in  his  youth  he  was  instructed  during  three  3-ears  in 
this  wi.sdom  of  the  Chalda^ans,  doubtless  had  the  effect  on  the  prophet  himself,  to  develop 
the  pro|)hetic  tendency  which  was  natural  to  him,  and  to  make  him  at  home  in  these  mysteri- 
ous regions  (chap.  i.  4,  5,  17).  It  must  have  afforded  him  an  education  similar  to  that  which 
Moses  derived  from  his  training  at  the  Egyptian  court,  or  that  drawn  by  the  modern  tlieolo- 
gian  from  the  study  of  philosophy.  He  learned,  however,  nothing  of  importance  from  the 
Chaldeans,  but  rather  soon  excelled  them  all  ten-fold  in  wisdom."  Furtlier,  compare  the 
same,  page  o4  et  seq.,  where,  conforming  to  the  Uabljius,  the  isolated  position  of  Daniel,  the 
apocalyiitist,  among  the  other  Old-Testament  prophets,  is  explained  and  interpreted  to  mean 
that  while  he  did  not  possess  the  nK^CJ  ni*i  or  pro|)er  jjrophetic  S])irit,  he  nevertheless 
partook  of  the  ""pil  ni^  or  "  Holy  Spirit,"  which  was  shared  also  by  the  remaining  writers 
of  the  Hagiographa,  for  which  reason  his  proper  place  was  among  this  class,  and  not  among 
t)ie  prophets.  Com|jare  also  the  definitions  which  are  quoted  in  that  connection  fiom  Witsius 
(Daniel  was  endowed  with  the  gift  of  prophecy  indeed,  liut  not  with  the  prophetic  office)  ; 
Irom  Bengel  (Daniel  was  "the  politician,  chronologer,  and  historian  among  the  prophets"); 
and  from  M.  Baumgarten  (Daniel  was  "  the  official  seer  ot  Jehovah  in  the  world-kingdom  "). 
— See  infra,  §  6,  note  1. 

•  Kliefoth  (Das  Biich  DanteU.  p.  48)  assents  to  this,  and  observes,  thHt  in  addition  to  the  fact  that,  "according  to  hii 
t'fllee  Daniel  was  not  a  prophet,  but  an  officer  of  the  state."  "  his  book  contained  prophecies  concerning  the  world-power,'' 
fcnd  fuither,  thai,  "  in  view  of  its  historical  matter,  his  book  is  a  historical  document  for  the  period  during  wiiich  Israrf 


CONTENTS  AND  FOlllI  OF  DAXIELS  PROPHECIES.  13 


§  3    Contents  and  Form  of  Daniel's  Pkophecies. 

The Jirst  or  historical  division  (chap,  i.-vi.)  of  the  two  which  compose  our  book  according  ^ 
to  §  1,  p.  1,  has  already,  so  far  as  its  principal  features  are  concerned,  been  analyzed  in  the 
preceding  paragraph,  which  narrates  the  leading  events  of  the  prophet's  life  in  exact  chrono- 
logical Older.  The  second  or  prophetical  division  (chajj.  vii.-xii. )  contains  the  prophetic 
elements  of  the  book,  but  not  so  exclusively  as  not  to  interweave  occasional  historical  and 
biographical  notices  with  its  predictions  (see  especially  the  mention  of  Daniel's  illness,  chap, 
viii.  27  ;  of  his  fasting,  mourning,  and  prayer,  chap.  ix.  1  et  seq.  ;  x.  2  ct  seq.  ;  of  his  \-isiou3 
on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris,  chap.  x.  4  et  seq. ;  xii.  5).  Nor  are  prophecies  entirely  wanting 
in  the  historical  division;  for  besides  the  interpretation  of  the  dream  relating  to  the  lycan- 
thropy  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (in  chap.  iv.  16-24),  which  is  equivalent  to  an  actual  prophecy  or 
special  prophetical  prediction,  and  also  besides  the  interpretation  of  the  mysterio\is  writing 
on  the  wall  of  Belshazzar's  banquet-hall,  which  likewise  testifies  to  Daniel's  prophetic  endow- 
ments (chap.  V.  17-28),  the  leading  features  of  the  narrative  in  chapter  ii.,  relating  to  the 
interpretation  of  Nebucliadnezzar's  first  dream  by  Daniel,  form  a  prophecy  of  the  specifically 
apocalyptic  kind  in  their  reference  to  the  history  of  kingdoms  and  of  the  w'orld.  The  great 
image  composed  of  gold,  silver,  brass,  iron,  and  clay,  the  so-called  image  of  tfie  monarchies, 
together  with  the  stone  that  destroys  it,  which  were  seen  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  his  dream, 
and  afterward  by  the  prophet,  in  a  night  vision,  were  interpreted  by  Daniel  by  vdrtue  of 
Divine  inspiration,  to  signify  a  succession  of  world-kingdoms  that  should  precede  the  king- 
dom of  Messiah  or  of  God,  commencing  with  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar  himself.  The 
golden  head  of  the  image  represented  the  existing  kingdom  of  Nebuchadnezzar  with  its 
exalted  power  and  greatness.  Upon  it  should  follow  a  second  and  inferior  kingdom,  and  a 
third,  that  should  bear  rule  over  all  the  earth  with  the  power  and  hardness  of  Ijrass  ;  after- 
wards a  fourth,  strong  as  iron,  which  should  crush  and  destroy  all  things  ;  and  finally  a 
divided  kingdom,  partly  of  iron  and  partly  of  clay,  i.  e..  partly  strong  and  partly  brittle, 
which,  tliough  seeking  to  coml)ine  its  several  parts,  should  yet  fail  to  develoj)  into  a  united 
whole.  In  the  time  of  this  divided  kingdom,  God  Himself  would  establish  a  kingdom  on 
the  earth,  which,  like  the  destroying  stone,  should  overturn  and  crush  all  the  world-kingdoms 
in  order  to  flourish  on  their  ruins  forever  (chap.  ii.  37-4-5).* 

*  [Keil  ( Commentary  on  Daniel,  Clarke's  tr.,  p.  S4)  ingeniously  traces  the  logical  position  of  the  chapters  in  this 
ttistorical  portion  as  follows.  He  regards  chaps.  ii.-iii.  as  comprising,  after  the  introductory  chap,  i.,  xheflr»t  part  of  the 
book,  containing  "  the  development  of  the  world-power,"'  and  remarks  that  "  this  part  contains  in  six  chapters  as  many 
reports  regarding  the  successive  forms  and  the  natural  character  of  the  world-powers.  It  be^ns  (chap,  ii.)  and  ends  (chap, 
vii.)  with  a  revelation  from  God  regarding  its  historical  unfolding  in  four  great  world-kingdoms  following  each  other,  and 
their  final  overthrow  by  the  kingdom  of  God.  which  shall  continue  for  ever.  Between  these  chapters  (ii,  and  vii.)  there 
are  inserted  four  events  belonging  to  the  times  of  the  first  and  .second  world-kingdoms,  which  partly  reveal  the  attempts 
of  the  rulers  of  the  world  to  compel  the  worshippers  of  the  true  God  to  pray  to  their  idols  and  their  gods,  together  with 
the  failure  of  this  attempt  (chaps,  iii.  and  vi. ),  and  partly  the  humiliations  of  the  rulers  of  the  world,  who  were  boastful  of 
their  power,  under  the  judgments  of  God  (chaps.  iv.  and  v.),  and  bring  under  our  consideration  the  relation  of  the  rulers  of 
This  world  to  the  Almighty  God  of  henven  and  earth  and  to  the  true  fearers  of  His  name.  The  narratives  of  these  four 
events  follow  each  other  in  chronological  order,  because  they  are  in  actual  relation  t)ound  together,  and  therefore  also  the 
occurrences  (chaps,  v.  and  vi.)  which  belong  to  the  time  subsequent  to  the  vision  in  chap.  vii.  are  placed  before  thia 
vision,  so  that  the  two  revelations  regarding  the  development  of  the  world-power  form  the  frame  within  which  is  con- 
tained the  historical  section  which  describes  the  character  of  tha  world-power."  The  second  part  of  the  entire  book,  as 
distributed  by  Keil  (chaps,  viii.-xii.).  is  designated  by  him  as  "the  development  of  the  kingdom  of  God" — thus  con- 
tra.sted  with  the  world  power  of  the  former  section.  This  latter  part  Keil  analyzes  as  follows  ;  "This  part  confciins  three 
revelations  which  Daniel  received  during  the  reigns  of  Belshazzar.  Darius  the  Mede,  and  Cyrus  the  Persian,  regarding 
the  development  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  After  de,«:ribing  in  the  first  part  the  development  of  the  world-power  and  ite 
relation  to  the  people  and  kingdom  of  God  from  the  days  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  its  founder,  down  to  the  time  of  its  final 
destruction  by  the  perfected  kingdom  of  God,  in  this  second  part  it  is  revealed  to  the  prophet  how  the  kingdom  of  God 
entered  against  the  power  and  enmity  of  the  rulers  of  the  world,  and  amid  severe  oppressions,  is  carried  forward  to  final 
victory,  and  is  perfected.  The  first  vision,  chap,  viii.,  represents  what  will  happen  to  the  people  of  God  during  the 
developments  of  the  second  and  third  world-kingdoms ;  the  second  revelation,  chap,  ix  ,  gives  to  the  prophet,  in  an.swer  to 
his  penitential  prayer  for  the  restoration  of  the  ruined  holy  city  and  the  desolated  sanctuary,  disclosures  regarding  the 
whole  development  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  from  the  close  of  the  Babylonian  exile  to  the  final  accomplishment  of  God's 
plan  of  salvation.  In  the  last  vision,  in  the  third  year  of  Cyrus,  chap,  x.-xii.,  he  received  yet  further  and  more  special 
revelations  regarding  the  severe  persecutions  which  await  the  people  of  God  for  their  purification,  in  the  nearer  futnrf 
under  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  in  the  time  of  the  end  under  the  last  fi-te,  the  Antichrist"  (p.  28-3).] 


I4  INTRODIJCTION  TO  THE  PEOPHET  DANIEL. 

Tliis  prophecy,  which  is  interwoven  with  the  first  or  historical  part,  is  closely  related  to  the 
first  prediction  of  the  prophetical  part  (chap,  vii.),  and  indeed  is  identical  with  it  in  purport. 
This  latter  prophecy  is  also  a  dream-vision  with  a  succeeding  Divinely- disclosed  inteqjreta- 
'  tion,  but  revealed  originally  and  solely  to  Daniel.  The  succession  of  the  four  woi-ld-kingdoms 
■which  began  with  that  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  in  this  instance  represented  by  four  beasts 
which  rise  in  succession  from  the  sea :  a  lion  with  eagle's  wings  and  the  heart  of  a  man,  a 
bear  with  three  ribs  in  its  ravenous  jaws,  a  leopard  with  four  wings  and  four  heads,  and  a 
fourth  terrible  monster  with  iron  teeth  and  ten  horns,  three  of  which  were  plucked  up  by  the 
roots,  and  re])laced  by  "  another  little  horn  "  with  human  eyes  and  a  mouth  that  spoke  pre- 
sumptuous blasphemies  (chap.  vii.  2-8).  The  fourth  of  these  kingdoms  is  now  descriljed 
somewliat  differently,  and  more  particularly,  as  a  fearful  reign  of  tyranny,  which  devoured 
the  earth  and  destroyed  and  ruined  all  things,  and  from  which  should  proceed  in  succession 
ten  kings,  who  are  symbolized  by  the  ten  horns.  Three  of  these  kings  are  to  be  superseded 
by  the  final  monarch,  who  is  represented  by  the  "  little  horn,"  and  whose  madness  and  blas- 
phemous presum2)tion  exceed  that  of  all  who  have  preceded  him,  so  that  he  speaks  blasphemy 
against  the  Highest,  makes  war  upon  the  saints  of  God,  and  aims  to  set  aside  the  law  and  the 
holy  seasons.  The  sufferings  of  the  people  of  God  at  the  hands  of  this  tyrant  are  limited  to 
three  and  a  half  years,  at  the  end  of  which  Divine  judgments  shall  be  visited  on  him  thiough 
one  like  the  Son  of  man,  who  comes  with  the  clouds  of  heaven,  and  to  whom  is  committed 
an  everlasting  dominion  over  all  nations. 

The  second  prophecy  of  the  second  part  (chap,  viii.)  also  stands  connected  in  its  subject 
and  purport  with  the  image  of  the  monarchies,  whose  middle  and  lower  parts  it  develops  and 
illustrates  more  fully.  Under  the  figure  of  a  contest  between  a  ram  and  a  he-goat,  it  describes 
the  overthrow  of  the  third  by  the  fourth  world-kingdom,  together  with  succeeding  events 
down  to  the  Slessianic  judgment.  A  ram  with  two  horns,  of  which  the  taller  appeared  last, 
pushes  fiercely  towards  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth,  until  a  he-goat  with  a  notable  horn, 
coming  from  the  west,  smites  him  to  the  ground,  and  breaks  his  two  homs.  Next,  the  great 
horn  of  the  victorious  goat  is  broken,  and  rejjlaced  by  four  other  notable  ones,  toward  the 
four  wiiids  of  heaven.  Out  of  one  of  these  comes  forth  a  little  horn,  which  increases  mightily 
toward  the  south,  the  east,  and  Judrea,  grows  even  to  the  host  of  heaven  and  its  prince, 
desecrates  the  sanctuary,  and  interrupts  the  offering  of  the  daily  sacrifice  during  a  period  of 
2,300  evenings  and  mornings  (i.e.  1,150  days,  or  three  and  a  half  years),  vers.  3-14.  The 
angel  Gabriel  interprets  this  vision  to  the  prophet,  and  applies  it  to  the  Medo-Persian  empire, 
which  should  be  overthrown  by  the  fourth  world-power,  founded  by  the  king  of  Grsccia 
(Alexander  the  Great),  and  also  to  the  four  more  important  kingdoms  of  the  Diadochi,  which 
should  arise  out  of  the  Greek  world-monarchy,  on  the  early  death  of  its  founder.  One  of 
these  latter  kingdoms  (that  of  the  Seleucidse)  should  become  especially  hurtful  to  the  people 
of  God  and  His  sanctuary,  through  the  craft  and  audacity  of  one  of  its  rulers,  until  finally 
the  breaking  of  tliis  offender  "  without  hand,"  i.  e.,  by  the  interference  of  a  superior  power 
should  come  to  pass.  [For  a  comparative  table  of  all  these  prophecies  see  §  10,  Note  3;  and 
for  a  refutation  of  the  "  year-day  "  hypothesis  on  which  the  application  of  the  fourth  king- 
dom exclusively  to  Papal  Rome  rests,  see  §  10,  Note  4.] 

A  third  vision  (chap,  ix.)  is  vouchsafed  to  the  prophet  in  connection  with  his  meditating  on 
the  meaning  of  the  seventy  years,  which  Jeremiah  had  predicted  should  elapse  before  the 
rebuilding  of  Jerusalem.  While  addressing  Jehovah  in  fervent  penitential  prayer,  in  con- 
nection with  his  meditations,  and  beseeching  Him  to  forgive  the  sins  of  His  people,  and  to 
turn  away  His  fury  from  Jerusalem  (vers.  3-19),  the  angel  Gabriel  discloses  to  him  the  mean- 
ing of  Jeremiah's  prophecy.  The  soventy  years  are  to  be  understood  as  seventy  weeks  of 
Tears.  Four  hundred  and  ninety  years  were  detennined,  in  order  to  atone  fully  for  the  sins 
of  the  people,  and  to  reanoint  tlie  Most  Holy  of  His  temple.  The  first  seven  of  the  seventy 
weeks  of  years  were  to  include  tlie  period  between  the  utterance  of  Jeremiah's  prophecy  and 
the  "  anointed  prince"  (Cyrus)  ;  in  th^  course  of  the  sixty-two  weeks  of  years  that  should 
follow,  the  city  (Jerusalem)  was  to  bj  rebuilt,  but  in  troublous  times.  The  last,  or  seventieth, 
week  of  years  should  begin  with  the  "  cutting  off  of  an  anointed  one,"  after  which  the  peoplf 


CONTENTS  AND  FORM  OF  DANIEL'S  PROPHECIES.  15 

and  their  sanctuary  were  to  be  devastated  by  the  armies  of  a  tyrant,  and  the  customary  offer 
ing  of  the  sacred  sacritices  and  oljlations  to  be  interrupted  during  the  half  of  a  week  (evidently 
during  the  latter  half  of  this  final  'week  of  years),  until,  in  the  end,  ruin  should  overtake  thr 
destroyer  *  (vers.  21-27;. 

T\xe^  filial  vision  (chaps,  x.-xii.)  contains  the  most  thorough  and  detailed  description  of  the 
developments  of  the  future.  After  three  weeks  of  fasting  and  mourning,  an  angel,  whose 
clothing  and  appearance  were  wonderful  (chajj.  x.  5-11),  appeared  to  the  prophet  on  the 
banks  of  the  Tigris,  and  gave  him  an  account  of  tlie  contests  which  he  was  compelled  tc 
enter  into  with  the  "  princes,"  or  angelical  protectors  of  Persia  and  Grsecia,  and  in  which  he 
■was  aided  only  by  Michael,  the  angel  of  God's  people  (chap.  x.  12-xi.  1).  To  this  account  he 
added  a  representation,  full  of  life  and  minute  detail,  of  the  immediate  future,  and  extending 
to  the  time  of  the  tyrannical  oppressor  of  God's  people,  who  has  already  been  frequently 
described.  In  this  connection  he  dwells  especially  upon  the  conflicts  of  the  kings  of  a 
Bouthern  kingdom  (Egypt)  and  a  northern  kingdom  (Syria),  which  were  to  constitute  the 
principal  states  that  should  arise  from  the  ruins  of  the  fourth  (Greek  or  Macedonian)  world- 
power  (chap.  xi.  2-20),  and  more  than  all,  on  the  insolent,  audacious,  and  blasphemous 
deportment  of  the  last  king  of  the  northera  realm,  who  should  ultimately  come  to  a  terrible 
end,  after  inflicting  the  most  horrible  abominations  on  the  holy  nation,  their  sacred  city,  and 
its  sanctuary  (chap.  xi.  21-45).  After  unparallelled  tribulation  and  afBiction,  deliverance 
and  salvation  should  come  to  Daniel's  nation,  in  connection  with  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
which  should  lead  to  tlie  exaltation  of  the  righteous,  but  consign  the  ungodly  to  everlasting 
punishment  (chap.  xii.  1-3).  f  After  the  angel  has  directed  the  prophet  to  seal  the  prophecy 
to  the  time  of  the  end  (ver.  4),  he  supplements  it  by  a  final  revelation  in  regard  to  the  dura- 
tion of  the  period  of  severe  affliction  before  the  introduction  of  Messiah's  kingdom,  which  is 
fixed  at  1,290,  or,  conditionally,  at  1,335  days  (vs.  7-12).  The  whole  closes  with  the 
counsel  of  the  angel  to  tlie  prophet,  to  wait  patientlj-  until  the  end  of  all  things,  and  until 
his  resurrection  to  eternal  life. 

The  arrangement  of  the  four  prophecies  of  the  second  part  is  strictly  chronological,  so  that 
the  order  of  their  succession  is  parallel  with  that  of  the  actual  events  in  Daniel's  life,  as 
recorded  in  the  first  part.  The  first  vision  appeared  to  him  "in  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar" 
the  king,  in  the  form  of  a  dream,  which  he  at  once  recorded  in  writing  (chap.  vii.  1) ;  the 
second,  in  the  third  year  of  the  same  reign,  "in  the  palace  of  Sliushaii,  in  the  province  of 
Elam,  by  the  river  of  Ulai," — wliere  the  jjrophet  in  his  exaltation  at  least  believed  himself  to 
be  (chap.  viii.  1,  2) ;  the  third,  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Darius  the  Mede,  hence  soon 
after  the  overthrow  of  Belshazzar  (chap.  ix.  1,  2;  cf.  v.  30;  vi.  1);  and  the  fourth,  "  in  the 
third  year  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,''  on  the  24th  day  of  the  first  month,  while  the  prophet  was 
on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris,  after  completing  his  fast  of  three  weeks  (chap.  x.  1-4  ;  cf.  xii  5, 
6).  The  first  vision  is  included  in  the  Aramaic  portion  of  the  book  ;  the  three  others,  like 
chap.  i.  and  the  opening  verses  of  chap.  ii.  (vers.  l-4a),  are  recorded  in  Hebrew. 

In  a  formal  point  of  view,  the  marked  difference  Ijetween  the  prophecies  of  the  second  part 
and  those  of  the  first  is  to  be  noticed,  namely,  that  in  the  latter  instance  the  interpretation  of 
the  wonderful  and  prophetic  appearance  of  the  vision  in  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  (chap,  ii.), 
and  of  the  mysterious  writing,  !Mene,  Mene,  Tekel,  etc.,  at  the  banquet  of  Belshazzar  (chap,  v.), 
was  imparted  to  tlie  prophet  immediately  through  tlie  Divine  Spirit,  and  without  the  agency 
of  angels ;  while  in  each  of  tlie  four  prophecies  of  tlie  second  part  angels  are  employed,  eitlier 
to  reveal  the  purport  of  the  visions  seen  by  Daniel  while  awake  or  dreaming  (as  in  the  case  of 
the  first  two,  chap.  vii.  and  viii.),  or  to  convey  direct  disclosures  relating  to  the  future, 
without  any  pre^^ous  symbolical  vision  (as  with  the  final  prophecies,  chap.  ix.  and  x.-xii.). 
The  prophet,  however,  is  the  only  narrator,  even  when  he  recapitulates  (as  is  the  case  especially 
in  chap.  X.  20-xii.  4)  the  extended  remarks  of  the  angel,  his  celestial  teachers  and  inter- 
preters.    The  epistolary  form  of  narration  which  occurs  once  in  the  first  part,  chap.  iii.  31-iv. 

*  Id  Bitpport  of  this  statement  of  the  contents  of  chap.  ix.  22-27,  and  especially  of  the  verse  last  mentioned,  com^«n 
the  exegetical  renftrks  on  that  pas.sage.     [For  counter  arguments,  see  the  additions  thereto.] 
t  [See,  however,  the  exegetical  remarlE8  on  this  last  particular.] 


16  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

34  (but  which  is  not  rigidly  adhered  to  in  that  connection,  sin:e  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  writei 
of  the  letter  under  our  notice,  is  referred  to  in  the  third  person,  in  chap.  iv.  25-30),  is  not 
found  in  the  second  part. 

Note. — In  opposition  to  the  division  of  the  contents  of  this  book  into  historical  and 
prophetico-visional  parts,  which  we  have  adopted,  Auberlen  (p.  <58),  and  ir.  connection  with 
him  Keil  {Eiiil.  ins  A.  T.,  2d  ed.,  p.  389  et  seq.),  and  also  Kranichfeld  {Uns  Buck  Daniel,  p.  2 
et  seq.),  contends  that  chap.  vii.  should  be  included  in  the  tirst  part.  The  reasons  adduced 
by  the  last  mentioned  exegete,  as  '"  material  "  in  contrast  with  ours  as  merely  "  formal,"  are, 
first,  the  prophetico-visional  elements  which  enter  also  into  the  first  part,  and  particularly  into 
chap,  ii.,  and  secondly,  the  identity  of  language  in  chap.  vii.  with  chapters  ii.-v.,  which 
forbids  a  ■n'idcr  separation  between  chapters  vi.  and  vii.  as  contrary  to  the  intention  of  the 
author.  But  the  visional  constituents  of  the  first  part  are  extremely  meagre  when  compared 
with  the  far  greater  proportion  of  the  narrative  elements  in  this  division  ;  and  the  chrono- 
logical diifcrence  between  chapters  vi.  and  vii.  is  decidedly  more  important  than  the  affinities 
of  language  between  chap.  vii.  and  the  five  chapters  that  precede  it.  The  dream-vision 
recorded  in  chapter  vii.  dates  back  to  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  the  last  (or  one  of  the  last)  of 
the  Baliylonian  kings,  wliile  the  historical  contents  of  the  preceding  chajiter  belong  to  the 
Medo-Persiau  jjcriod ;  hence  the  time  of  chapter  vii.  and  also  of  chap.  viii.  corresponds  to 
that  of  chapter  v.,  while  chapter  vi.  is  contemj)orary  with  chapter  ix.  Since  the  general 
arrangement,  both  of  the  pre-eminently  historical  chajjters  of  the  first  part,  and  of  the  chiefly 
visional  contents  of  the  second,  is  strictly  chronological,  the  distribution  of  the  entire  book 
into  the  categories  of  history  and  prophecy  seems  to  have  been  the  leading  idea  by  which  its 
editor  (whom  we  regard  as  identical  with  its  author)  was  governed,  while  the  identity  of 
language  in  chapter  vii.  and  the  preceding  chapters  sinks  into  a  merely  accidental  feature. 
The  following  section  may  serve  to  show  the  most  probable  explanation  of  this  feature.  For 
the  2>re3eut,  we  are  only  concerned  to  show  that  the  arrangement  adopted  hy  us,  even  if  't 
were  based  more  on  a  formal  than  a  material  principle,  conforms  fully  to  the  idea  and  design 
of  the  writer,  and  is  therefore  with  justice  retained  by  a  majority  of  modem  expositors— even 
by  Zundel  (p.  39  et  seq.),  Reusch  (Eiitl.  ins  A.  T.,  3d  ed.,  p.  109),  and  others. 

§  4.  Unity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

The  integrity  of  this  book  may  be  conclusively  shown,  despite  the  occasional  attempts 
essayed  by  recent  critics  to  represent  it  as  a  compilation  of  several  historical  and  prophetic 
fragments  of  various  origin ;  for,  as  has  been  shown  in  §  3,  the  contents  of  the  two  principal 
divisions  form  a  harmonious  and  closely-connected  whole,  which  must  have  emanated  from  a 
single  author.  This  author  is  frequently  designated  as  one  and  the  same  person — as  Daniel — 
particularly  in  chap.  vii.  1  ;  xiii.  1  ;  ix.  3  ;  x.  1  ;  xii.  4  ;  and  he  is  mentioned  either  in  the 
third  person  (chap,  vii.  1  ;  x.  1)  or  in  the  first  (chap.  vii.  2  et  seq.  ;  x.  2  et  seq.).  The  same 
interchange  of  the  first  and  third  persons  is  found  elsewhere  in  writings  of  the  Old  Testament 
that  have  emanated  from  a  single  author,  e.g.,  Isa.  vii. ;  xxxvi.-xxxix.,  etc.  The  fact  that 
Daniel  is  mentioned  exclusively  in  the  third  person  throughout  the  first  six  chapters  is  suffi- 
ciently explained  by  the  historical  and  descriptive  character  of  this  first  main  division,  which 
merely  reports  occasional  expressions  by  Daniel,  of  greater  or  less  extent  (e.g.,  chap.  ii.  15,  20, 
23,  30;  iv.  16  et  seq.  ;  v.  17  et  seq.  ;  vi.  22  et  seq.),  but  generally  represents  other  persons  as 
Bpeaking  and  acting.  The  absence  from  this  part  of  the  formula,  "I,  Daniel,  saw,"  or  "I, 
Daniel,  said,"  could  only  hold  as  an  argument  against  the  unity  of  the  book,  in  case  other 
discrepancies  and  contradictions  of  importance  existed  Ijetween  the  contents  of  the  two  parts. 
Such  contradictions,  however,  do  not  occur.  It  is  not  impossible  to  reconcile  chapter  i.  21 
with  chapter  x.  1,  or  chapter  vi.  1  with  chapters  ix.  1  and  xi.  1,  etc.,  as  the  exposition  of  those 
passages  will  show  in  detail.  The  historical  part  is  rather  connected  with  the  prophetical  in 
manifold  relations,  and  their  chronological  parallelisms  especially  bear  the  marks  of  design 
on  the  part  of  the  composer.  The  series  of  remarkable  events  in  his  life,  which  are  first 
recorded,  is  designed  as  a  historical  introduction,  or  scaffolding,  for  the  prophetic  visions 
which  follow.  But  within  the  historical  part  itself,  chapter  i.  is  intimately  connected,  as  an 
introduction,  with  the  five  chapters  that  follow.  Daniel's  prophetic  power  and  skill  in  inter- 
preting dreams,  are  remarked  in  chap.  i.  17,  20,  evidently  with  reference  to  the  tests  to  which 
they  were  to  be  exposed,  chap.  ii.  4,  5.     The  mention  of  the  three  friends  in  chap.  L  C  et  seq. 


XmiTY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  17 

paves  the  way  for  the  narrative  respecting  tlieir  official  stations  and  confessorship  (chap.  ii. 
49 ;  iii.  1  et  seq.).  The  statement  that  Nebuchadnezzar  removed  the  sacred  vessels  of  the 
temple  from  Jerusalem  is  a  preparation  for  the  history  of  their  desecration  by  Belshazzar 
(chap.  ii.  5  et  seq.). 

Nor  does  the  diversity  of  language,  as  between  the  Chaldee  of  chapters  ii.-vii.  and  the 
Hebrew  of  the  remaining  chapters,  involve  a  multiplicity  of  authors;  for,  aside  from  the  fact 
that  a  transition  from  the  Hebrew  to  the  Chaldee,  exactly  similar  to  that  in  Dan.  ii.  4,  occurs 
in  Ezra  iv.  7,  the  idea  of  a  variety  of  authors  becomes  impossible  in  view  of  the  intimate 
relation  of  the  Hebrew  chapter  i.  to  the  succeeding  Aramaic  sections,  which  has  just  been 
noticed.  The  last  (chap,  vii.)  of  the  Aramaic  portions,  again,  is  so  closely  connected  in  its 
leading  features  with  the  Heljrew  sections  that  follow — and  especially  with  chapter  viii.  which 
is  introduced  by  the  indication  of  time,  in  a  manner  entirely  analogous  to  chap.  vii.  1 — that 
the  discrepancy  of  language  in  this  case  also  appears  evidently  as  a  feature  of  secondary 
importance.  The  contrast  between  the  use  of  the  Hebrew  in  the  introductory  and  the  five 
closing  chapters,  and  of  the  Chaldee  in  chapters  ii.-vii.  can  appear  as  other  than  accidental, 
only  as  the  latter  sections  seem  to  have  been  reduced  to  writing  at  an  earlier  period  than  the 
former.  They  were  probably  recorded  during  tlio  Chalda?an  supremacy  or  immediately  after- 
ward, whereas  the  Hebrew  sections  tliat  enclose  them  were  probably  added  at  a  considerably 
later  date,  and  in  the  time  of  the  Persian  rule.  This  liypothesis  (first  assumed  l)y  Kranich- 
feld)  of  a  gradual  completion  of  the  book,  or  of  tlie  framing  of  tlie  Clialdiuan  sections,  which 
originated  during  the  exile  proper,  between  the  Heljrew  portions,  chaps,  i.  1-ii.  4  and  viii.-xii., 
that  date  in  the  Persian  period,  is  favored  by  the  note  in  cliap.  i.  21,  which  implies  the  later 
composition  of  the  introduction,  but  more  especially  by  the  circumstance  that  the  Chaldee 
fragments,  without  exception,  convey  tlie  impression  that  they  were  recorded  in  the  style  of 
chronicles,  immediately  after  the  events  transjiired  to  which  they  relate.  They  also  seem  to 
indicate  that  the  author  employed  this  language  for  such  journalistic  minutes,  as  being  more 
familiar,  in  view  of  his  culture  (compare  §  2),  while  he  adopted  the  Hebrew  at  a  later 
period,  perhaps  because  he  had  in  the  meantime  acquired  a  sufficient  readiness  in  its  use,  or 
because  the  different  circumstances  of  the  times  subsequent  to  the  captivity  might  lead  him 
to  regard  the  sacred  language  of  the  law  and  the  earlier  prophets  as  more  appropriate  for  his 
purpose  of  instructing  and  edifying  his  theocratic  comijatriots.  We  therefore  assert  the 
integrity  of  this  book  with  reference  to  all  its  leading  divisions,  and  as  being  the  work  of  a 
single  author ;  but  in  the  closing  section  of  the  second  part,  in  the  especially  detailed  piophe- 
cies  of  chapters  x.-xii.,  we  detect  tlie  hand  of  a  later  interpolating  reviser  of  the  time  of 
Antioclius  Epiphanes,  for  reasons  wliich  liave  been  generally  indicated  (§  1,  note  2),  but  the 
more  detailed  elaboration  of  wliich  must  be  reserved  for  the  exposition  (see  especially  on 
chap.  xi.  vs.  5  and  40,  etc.).  Such  interpolations  are  apparent  more  iiarticularly  in  chapter 
xi.  5-39  {e.g.,  vs.  5,  6,  8,  14,  17,  18,  25,  27,  30-39). 

Note  1. — J.  D.  Michaelis,  Bertholdt,  and  Eichhom  (at  least  in  the  earlier  editions  of  hia 
Einhitung).  among  those  who  reject  the  integrity  of  this  book,  find  a  considerable  uunil>er  of 
independent  compositions  contained  in  it,  which  are  said  to  have  been  written  at  different 
times  and  by  various  authors.  Of  such  compositions  Michaelis  enumerates  eight.  Eichliom 
ten  (in  vol.  III.  of  his  Hehriiisrhe  Projiheten,  p.  428  et  seq.,  at  least  five),  and  Bertholdt  nine. 
The  latter  refers  the  first  (chap,  i.)  of  these  "  Daniclana,"  as  he  calls  them,  to  the  time  of 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus ;  the  second  (chap,  ii.)  to  that  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus ;  the  third 
(chap.  iii.  1-30)  to  a  somewhat  later  date;  tlie  fourth  (iii.  31-iv.  34)  to  the  age  of  tlie  first 
Asmon.Tans ;  the  fiftii.  sixth,  and  seveutli  (cliaps.  v.-viii.)  to  tlie  same  period,  under  Antiochua 
E|)iphaues ;  the  eiglith  fcliaj).  ix.)  by  a  priest  at  Jerusalem,  to  a  date  but  little  later  ;  and  the 
ninth  (chap,  x.-xii.)  to  a  still  later  time.  The  composers  of  the  later  sections  are  said  gener- 
ally to  liave  known  the  earlier  writers,  and  to  have  continued  their  work,  in  which  effort  they 
even  imitated  their  predecessors  in  the  use  of  single  words  and  phrases.  But  despite  tlieir 
care  numerous  contradictions  crept  into  the  separate  parts,  so  that,  for  instance,  cliap.  i.  21  is 
opposed  to  X.  1  ;  chap.  i.  1,  5  to  ii.  1  ;  chap.  ii.  48,  49  to  v,  11-14,  etc.  (Bertholdt,  Daniel  i. 
93  et  seq.).  The  impropriety  of  such  a  mutilation  of  Scripture  was  soon  undei-stood,  and  wa? 
pointed  out.  with  convincing  arguments,  especially  liy  Bleek  (in  Schleiermacher's  Theol.  Zeit- 
tehrift,  1822,  No.  3,  p.  241  et  seq.;  compare  his  Kinleitung  ins  A.  T.,  p.  585  et  seq), 
2 


18  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

Havernick  {Eiid.  II.  2,  p.  443  et  seq.),  and  De  Wette  {Eirdeitung  in  das  A.  T.,  §  25Cj.  Hence 
Eichhorn,  in  the  third  and  fourth  editions  of  his  Einleitung,  contented  himself  with  the 
assumption  of  merely  two  authors,  of  wliom  the  one  composed  chap.  ii.  4-vi.  29,  and  the 
other,  chap,  vii-xii.,  together  with  the  Hebrew  introduction,  chap.  i.  1-ii.  3,  in  each  case 
long  after  the  captivity.  The  two-fold  authorship  is  also  asserted  by  Sack  {Christl. 
Apohgetik,  1829),  Herbst  (Histor.-Jcrit.  EM.,  published  by  Welte,  1840  and  later,  ii.  2,  §  34), 
r.  S|)eil  (Zitr  Echtheit  des  B.  Daniel,  in  the  Tub.  T/ieol.  Qiiartal-Schrift,  1863,  p.  194J,  Reusch 
{Eiid.,  p.  110),  and  several  others,  inasmuch  as  they  regard  the  visional  part  of  the  book, 
beginning  with  chap,  vii.,  as  genuine,  but  claim  that  the  narrative  of  Daniel's  life  and  of  the 
circumstances  of  his  time,  contained  in  chap,  i.-vi.,  was  added  by  a  later  hand,  and  based 
upon  a  revision  of  certain  genuine  memoranda,  which  were  left  by  the  prophet  at  liis  death. 
Hence,  we  are  to  distinguish  between  genuine  originals,  written  by  the  prophet  himself,  and  a 
.ater  compilation  which  belongs  to  the  Maccabfean  period  or  to  the  age  immediately  preceding, 
and  in  which  the  author  possessed  the  skill  to  imitate  the  prophet's  mode  of  thought  and 
expression,  thus  producing  the  impression  of  a  united  apocalyptic  whole.  Such  an  origin  of 
the  book  cannot  be  branded  as  wholly  impossible ;  but  the  impression  of  closely  connected, 
systematic,  and  designed  unity  which  it  makes,  in  respect  to  both  its  form  and  matter,  appears 
to  favor  the  view  stated  above,  by  which  the  first  and  second  editor  constitute  a  single  person- 
age, identical  with  the  prophet  Daniel,  and  by  which  the  whole  appears  as  the  work  of  one 
mind,  despite  its  gradual  production  in  the  period  immediately  before  and  after  the  close  of 
the  exile  (compare  the  following  note). 

Three  additional  hypotheses  concerning  the  origin  of  the  book  deseiTe  attention,  which 
like\\nse  proceed  on  the  assumption  of  a  two-fold  authorship,  or  of  a  distinction  between  a 
genuine  original  and  a  later  interpolating  revision,  but  which  differ  greatly  among  themselves. 
According  to  the  editor  [Lange]  of  tliis  Bihh-worh  (Einl.  in  das  A.  2\,  in  the  remarks  ))relimi- 
nary  to  the  exposition  of  Genesis,  vol.  I.,  p.  38  [of  the  Am.  ed.]),  the  book,  which  otherwise 
originated  entirely  with  the  captive  prophet  Daniel,  received  two  extensive  additions  in  its 
fin.al  sections,  at  the  hands  of  an  aj30calyptist  cf  the  Maccabsean  period,  who  was  led  to  make 
these  interjiolations  in  view  of  the  severe  trials  of  the  time.  These  additions  comprise  chap. 
X.  1-xi.  44,  and  xii.  5-13;  hence  the  predictions  which  relate  specially  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
and  his  time,  and  which  bear  pre-eminently  the  stamp  of  vatieinia  ex  erentu.  The  professed 
interpolation  of  2  Pet.  i.  20-iii.  3  from  the  epistle  of  Jude,  which  the  editor  has  endeavored 
to  establish,  iu  vol.  I.  of  his  Oeschichte  des  nposU'lisclien  Zeitedters  (p.  152  et  seq.),  more  thor- 
oughly than  this  asserted  addition  to  Daniel,  is  adduced  as  an  analogous  instance ;  but  it 
does  not  seem  to  be  sufficiently  demonstrated,  despite  the  manifold  advantages  it  would  afford 
to  the  apologist.  We  are  obliged  to  prefer  the  view  of  a  mere  interpolating  revision  of  chap- 
ters x.-xii.  by  a  pious  apocalyptist  of  the  Asmonsan  period,  and  to  hold  to  the  jirobable  inser- 
tion of  several  brief  passages,  which  cannot  in  our  day  be  clearly  distinguislied.  instead  of 
accepting  the  introduction  of  the  lengthy  section,  chap.  x.  1-xi.  44,  together  with  that  in  cliap. 
xii.  5-13.  A  later  inventor  of  the  entire  prophetic  imagery  of  chapters  x.  and  xi.  would  dis- 
jjlay  an  incredible  talent  in  his  imitations  of  the  prophet's  literary  style.  jMoreover,  the  writer 
of  Ecclesiasticus  (about  B.  C.  180)  seems  to  have  recognized  passages  like  chap.  x.  13,  20,  as 
original  with  Daniel,  and  to  have  imitated  them  as  such  ;  also  the  Septuagint.  See  below 
§  6,  note  2,  and  compare  tlie  exegesis  of  the  chapters  in  question.*  The  view  of  Ewald  (Die 
Pmp/iete./i  des  A.  Bds.,  1st  ed.,  II.  562  et  seq.)  is  peculiar.  According  to  him,  the  prophet 
Daniel  lived  at  the  heathen  court  of  Nineveh  as  early  as  the  Assyrian  captivity,  about  B.  C. 
700.  A  .Jewish  contemporary  of  Alexander  the  Great  invented  prophecies  relating  to  the 
world-kingdoms,  and  attrilnited  them  to  this  wise  man  of  the  Assyrian  period,  while  another 
Jew,  living  iu  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  added  further  embellishments  to  the  book  as  he 
found  it.  Somewhat  more  definite  and  thoughtful  is  Bunsen  (Gott  in  der  Geschicht-e,  I.  514  et 
eeq.).  The  Daniel  of  Assyrian  times,  who  lived  at  Nineveh  under  Pul  and  Sargon,  about  the 
middle  of  the  8th  century  B.  C.  left  behind  him  figurative  prophecies  concerning  the  destruc- 
tion of  Asshur  (the  winged  lion)  by  the  Babylonian  empire  (a  devouring  bear ;  cf.  chap.  vii. 
2  et  seq.)  ;  these  ancient  oracles,  together  with  legendary  records  concerning  the  personal  for- 
tunes of  Daniel,  and  particularly  his  deliverance  from  the  den  of  lions,  were  transmitted,  either 
verbally  or  in  writing,  until  a  writer  of  the  Maccabsean  period  gave  them  their  present  form, 
in  connection  with  which  work,  however,  he  committed  the  grave  historical  error  of  transfer- 
ring the  prophet  to  the  period  of  the  Babylonian  captivity,  and  of  substituting  the  Babylonian 
monarchy  for  the  Assyrian,  and  the  Medo-Persian  for  the  original  Babylonian  (cf.  above,  §  2, 
note  2).  Neither  Ewald  nor  Bunsen  are  able  to  furnish  any  j)ositive  proof  in  support  of  these 
strained,  artificial,  and  fantastic  views.  The  assertion  that  the  later  Jewish  writers  constantly 
substituted  Babylon  for  Asshur  is  entirely  arbitrary  and  incapable  of  proof;  and  the  removal 
of  Daniel  to  "  the  great  river  which  is  Hiddekel  "  can  no  more  he.  considered  a  mere  echo  of 
the  history  of  Daniel  in  Nineveli.  tlian  tlie  imaginary  winged   creatures  witli  human  visages 

*   [We  dhall  there  endeavor  to  ebow  that  all  these  suppoBitionB  of  any  interpolation  whatever  are  gratuitous  and  unsup 
rorttd.] 


UNITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  19 


can  be  regarded  as  dark  allusions  to  the  colossal  statues  on  the  palaces  of  Nimrud.  In  our 
exposition  of  the  related  passages  we  will  aim  to  show  that  both  these  features  may  be 
adequately  explained  on  the  assum])tion  of  a  Babylonian  career  in  the  case  of  the  prophet. 
Bunsen,  however,  appears  to  have  subsequently  given  up  his  arbitrary  view,  in  favor  of  the 
general  pseudo-Daniel  tendency-hypothesis  (see  the  prefaces  in  vol.  I.  of  his  Bibelwerl;  p.  liv.)  ; 
while  the  view  of  Ewald  appears  unchanged  in  the  recent  2d  edition  of  his  Projtheten  del 
Alten  Bundes  (vol.  UI.  p.  312  et  seq.)- 

Note  2. — In  support  of  the  opinion  laid  down  in  this  section,  that  the  book  was  composed 
at  different  times  by  Daniel  himself,  compare  Kranichfeld,  I)as  Buck  Daniel  {Einl.,  p.  i) : 
"  For  the  rest,  the  Chaldee  fragments  in  their  present  state,  without  an  incorporated  introduc- 
tion and  conclusion,  cannot  in  themselves  have  foimed  a  separate  work.  Their  formal  and 
abrupt  character  produces  rather  the  impression  of  an  occasional  composition  in  the  mannei 
of  a  diary,  which  was  undertaken  at  different  times,  and  perhaps  in  connection  with  corre- 
sponding events  of  the  exile  in  the  Chaldsean  period,  while  the  conception  of  the  Hebrew 
introduction  may  have  fallen,  agreeably  to  the  remark  in  chap.  i.  21,  in  the  time  of  the  Persian 
supremacy.  Presuming  the  genuineness  of  the  book,  the  overthrow  of  both  the  Chaldiean  and 
the  Persian  dynasties  in  Babylon  would  therefore  have  occurred  between  the  composition  of 
the  several  Chaldee  fragments  and  that  of  the  Hel>rew  section,  chap.  i.  1-ii.  4  ;  and  a  very 
different  condition  of  affairs,  having  an  es])ecial  significance  for  Israel,  would  meanwhile  have 
been  introduced.  This  would  also  be  sufficient  to  account  for  the  choice  of  the  Hebrew  dress 
chapters  viii.-xii.,  and,  in  general,  to  establish  their  subsequent  composition,  which  is  now 
more  than  ever  a  question  of  interest."  Compare  the  same  writer,  p.  53  et  seq.  :  "  The  com- 
position of  the  Chaldee  fragments  accordingly  b"longed  to  a  time  in  which  the  heathen 
oppressors  as  such,  and  the  measures  of  the  heathen  tyranny,  were  everywhere  prominent ;  and 
it  is  natural  that  a  theoci'atical  writer  of  this  period  should  fi.x  his  gaze  on  these  features,  and 
clothe  his  narrative  in  a  form  likely  to  be  effective  among  the  Chalda;an  population,  and  ser- 
viceable to  oppose  their  hostile  and  insolent  measures,  as  well  as  that  he  should  attempt  this 
in  the  Chaldoean  language,  which  was  current  among  the  oppressors.  *  Witli  the  close  of  the 
exile  a  new  range  of  visicm  opened  before  the  theocrat.  The  oppressive  tyranny  which  was 
before  his  leading  thought,  is  no  longer  prominent  in  that  character ;  the  hitherto  passive 
people  of  the  theocracy  is  now  roused  to  a  more  active  concern  for  its  national  interests. 
Appropriate  as  was  the  Chaldee  tongue  before  the  dawning  of  the  new  period,  tlie  language 
of  ills  people  and  of  the  fathers,  which  the  writer  employs,  in  conmion  with  tlie  prophets  after 
the  exile,  to  convey  his  su|)])lemental  and  additional  matter,  is  no  less  appropriate  after  tii»t 
period  has  begun.  With  his  attention  fixed  U|)on  his  people,  the  prophet  now  gave  its  final 
and  united  form  to  his  book,  dunng  the  fijst  year  of  the  sole  reign  of  Cyrus,  as  has  been 
noticed  above.  The  Chaldee  portions,  which  were  composed  during  the  captivity,  and  whose 
form  was  due  to  that  circumstance,  received  their  place  in  the  book  in  connection  with  this 
final  revision  ;  and  there  was  no  reason  why  the  existing  Chaldee  material  should  bo  rendered 
into  Hebrew  for  the  benefit  of  his  compatriots,  who  wnre  familiar  with  the  language  of  Baby- 
Icin,  especially  as  the  Chaldee  dress  itself  contributed  not  a  little  to  the  vivid  representation  of 
the  circumstances  described." 

We  accept,  in  all  its  essential  features,  this  hypothesis  respecting  the  composition  of  out 
liook  as  being  highly  probable  and  attractive  ;  f  but  instead  of  finding  in  a  designed  reference 
to  the  Chaldfean  oppressors  the  motive  which  induced  the  prophet  to  compose  in  Aramaic  the 
portions  (chap,  ii.-vii.)  belonging  to  the  e.xile,  we  would  adopt  the  more  simple  and  natural 
view,  that  during  tliat  period  he  was  accustomed  to  employ  the  Chaldee  tongue,  with  which 
he  was  chiefly  familiar ;  and  that,  in  his  written  productions  especially,  he  availed  himself  of 
its  use.  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others.  This  docs  not  iuvolve  the  admission  that  he  may  not 
already  at  that  time  have  acquired,  by  means  of  rending  and  stvdy,  that  marked  familiarity 
with  the  sacred  language  and  literature  of  his  people,  which  chap.  i.  17,  20  (cf.  with  i.  4) 
seem  to  imply.  In  this  connsction  we  would  also  venture  the  supposition  with  respect  to  the 
"  occasional  journalizing  notes  "  of  events  belonging  to  the  Chalda?an  (and  Median)  period, 
as  found  in  chap,  ii.-vii.,  that  Daniel  employed  with  design  the  chronicling  style  of  the  older 

*  [On  the  contrary,  such  a  stat«  of  opprepsion,  if  it  existed  at  the  time  (of  which  there  is  no  evidence),  would  have  ren- 
Icred  the  foreign  t«ngue  odioup,  and  therefore  been  the  strongest  possible  reason  for  avoiding  it.  Such  was  certainly  tta 
elTect  at  a  later  date,  when  Antiochns  sought  to  introduce  the  Greek  language  and  customs.  In  the  Roman  period,  too, 
«-e  know  that  the  comparatively  mild  rule  of  the  conquerors  made  the  Jews  only  cling  the  more  tena  nously  to  "  tk£  eacied 
tongue."  at  least  for  all  their  religious  works.] 

t  [We  beg  leave,  however,  to  dissent  almost  entirely  from  Kranichfeld's  views  on  this  head.  A  far  more  natural  and 
Bufficlent  reason  for  the  insertion  of  the  Chaldee  portions  of  the  book  is  found  in  the  fact,  stated  or  implied  in  their  respec- 
tive contents  that  they  were  extracts,  taken  verbatim  and  as  snch  from  the  Babylonian  state  records.  The  supposition 
that  the  whole  book  was  originally  written  in  Chaldee,  and  these  parts  alone  left  nntranslnted.  ia  destitute  of  a  jiarticle  of 
ccnfirmation,  either  in  the  narrative,  the  style  of  the  composition,  or  the  usage  of  the  contemijorary  Jewish  writers. 
EspeciiiUy  the  insinuation  that  Daniel  was  so  ignorant  of  his  mother  tongue,  that  he  was  obliged  to  learn  it  in  m&Um  life 
by  a  slow  and  imperfect  process,  as  the  author  a  few  sentences  further  on  presumes,  is  contrary  to  oU  the  probabilitiee  in 
Uie  case.] 


so  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

prophets,  which  regarded  all  the  facts  to  he  related  from  a  strictly  theocratical  point  of  view, 
and  by  which  their  supernatural  features  were  rather  intensified  and  idealized,  than  simplified 
and  reduced  to  sober  events  of  common  occurrence.     Compare  §  9,  Note  1. 

§  5.  Authenticity  of  the  Book. 

a.  Review  of  the  Attacls  on,  and  Defence  of,  its  Genuineness. 

The  most  ancient  assailant  of  the  genuineness  of  Daniel's  prophecies  of  whom  we  have  a 
certain  knowledge,  was  the  Neo-platonic  Porphyry  (died  A.  D.  304).  In  his  fifteen  booka 
"  against  the  Christians,"  which  are  known  to  us  only  through  Jerome  so  far  as  they  contair 
attacks  on  this  book,  he  contends  for  its  composition  in  Maccabsean  times,  and  for  the  forged 
character  of  its  prophecies  as  mere  vaticinia  ex  eventu*  It  is  uncertain  whether  Jewish  rabbins 
who  o])posed  Cln-istianity  were  his  predecessors  and  instructors  in  this  assertion,  or  not.  A 
passage  in  the  Talmud,  which  attributes  the  "recording"  of  several  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  among  them  Daniel,  to  the  members  of  the  Great  Synagogue  beginning  with  Ezra,! 
affords  uo  support  to  the  opinion  that  the  authenticity  of  the  book  was  denied  in  pre-Christian 
times  in  Jewish  circles,  since  that  "  recording"  is  doubtless  not  to  be  understood  in  the  sense 
of  an  original  composition,  but  rather  as  a  renewed  recording  on  the  authority  of  an  exact 
tradition,  or  rather,  of  a  new  inspiration.  The  entii-e  statement  is,  therefore,  merely  an  empty 
legend  of  the  sort  which  is  represented  by  the  Jewish  tales  concerning  the  marvellous  repro- 
duction of  the  Pentateuch  by  Ezra,  the  origin  of  the  Septuagint,  etc.  The  statement  of  Isidore 
of  Seville  (died  A.  D.  636)  that  "  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  are  said  to  have  been  written  by  certain 
wise  men  "  J  points  back  to  the  same  muddy  Jewish-rabbinical  source.  The  "  T\-ise  men  "  in 
this  case  can  scarcely  be  other  than  the  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue,  and  their  "  writing  "  of 
the  books  of  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  cannot  designate  a  forgery  in  any  sense,  but  must  be  explained 
as  in  the  Talmudic  tradition  referred  to.  In  short,  the  older  period  exhibits  no  definite 
instance  of  the  rejection  of  the  authenticity  of  this  prophetic  book  beyond  the  solitary  one  of 
Porphyry ;  and  only  the  immediate  ojiponents  of  this  writer,  as  Methodius,  Eusebius  of 
Ca»sarca,  ApoUinaris  of  Laodicea,  or  church  fathere  of  the  age  next  following,  were  engaged  in 
the  defense  of  the  genuineness  of  the  book,  while  refuting  his  objections. 

In  tlie  17th  century  the  opponents  of  its  genuineness  became  somewhat  more  numerous,  but 
tlicir  olijections  were  at  first  without  any  scientific  value.  Spinoza  {Tractat.  theol.-polit.,  x.  130 
et  seq.)  lield,  that  only  chap,  viii.-xii.  were  genuine ;  chap,  j.-vii.  might  originally  have 
formed  component  parts  of  the  annals  of  the  Chaldisan  reigns,  which,  together  with  the  final 
fix  e  chapters,  wei-e  probably  collected  and  published  by  a  later  hand.  Hobbes  (Leviathan,  c. 
33)  doubted  whether  Daniel  himself  or  a  subsequent  writer  had  recorded  his  projjhecies.  Sii 
Isaac  Newton  (  Ohservations  upon  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  I.  p. 
10),  whose  view  was  followed,  in  the  main,  l)y  Beausobre  (Remarques  sur  le  N.  Test.,  I.  p.  70), 
tliought  that  "  the  last  six  chapters  contained  prophecies  composed  at  various  times  by  Daniel 
himself,  while  the  six  former  ones  were  a  collection  of  historical  essays  by  other  authors." 
By  this,  however,  he  did  not  intend  to  attack  the  credibility  or  the  inspired  character  of  the 
book  ;  on  tlie  contrary,  he  declai'ed  splemnly  that  "  whoever  rejects  the  jjrophecies  of  Daniel, 
does  as  much  as  if  he  undermined  the  Christian  religion,  which,  so  to  speak,  is  founded  on 
Daniel's  prophecies  of  Christ."  If  he  regarded  the  first  six  chapters  as  not  the  work  of  Daniel, 
it  was  not  because  he  objected  to  tlie  wonders  recorded  in  them,  as  Ziindel  thinks  (Eritische 
Untersnchnngen,  etc.,  p.  2),  but  Ijecause  he  believed  that  their  mode  of  presentation  indicated 
one  or  several  authors  other  than  Daniel.     It  was  different,  however,  with  Collins,  the  deisti 

•  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Dan.  Pt-ophet. :  *^  Contra  prophetam  Danietem  scripnit  Pojpftyriu.'i,  nolenn  ewm  ab  ipso,  cuius 
tnitcriptus  ett  nomine,  esse  compositum,  seti  a  quodani,  qui  temporibUK  Antiochi  Epiphanvi  fuerit  in  .Juda'a  :  et  non  ta7n 
Dauielem  Ventura diTi^se,  quam  ilium  naraxse pr<vteiita.  Denique quicquid  usque  ad  Anliochum  dixerit  verttm kistoriam 
contlnere,  si  quid  autem  ultra  opinatus  est.  quia  futura  nescierit,  esse  mentitum.^^ 

t  Baha  Itathra,  f.  16 :  "  Viri  Sijungnqit  ntagmp  sn-ipserunt  K.  N.  D.  O.,  quibus  liierts  signijlcnntur  libri  Ezechitlis, 
dundt^rlm  pruphetamni  minoruni,  Danietis  et  Estfiert^." 

X  Tpidore.  OHf/f/.,  vi.  2 ;  ^*  Ezecfiiel  et  Daniel  a  viris  quibnsdam  sapieutihus  scripti  esse  perhibentur."''  Cf .  Hen^tenberjj, 
Die  Authentie  des  Daniel,  etc.,  p.  3,  where  the  opinion  of  Bortholiit  (Eiut.  ins.  A.  T.,  iv.  16Ub),  tbut  a  doubt  uf  the  Kenuine 
nc««  rt  Daniel  is  here  implied,  is  reiectcd,  and  certainly  with  justice. 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  21 

cal  contemijorary  of  Newton,  and  -with  the  somewhat  older  Jewish  atheist  Uriel  Acosta  (about 
A.  D.  1600),  who  denied  the  credibility  of  the  book  together  with  its  genuiileness,  but  with  a 
bungling  criticism  that  is  wholly  involved  in  the  prejudices  of  naturalistic  dogmatism.* 

Among  the  representatives  of  German  rationalism,  Semler  contented  himself  with  a  very 
general  denial  of  the  inspiration  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  for  the  reason  that  he  "  could  discovei 
no  such  benefit  in  it  as  God  always  designs  to  secui'e  to  man  when  he  employs  very  peculiar 
means  for  that  end  "  (Freie  Untersuchuag  des  Kanon,  HI.  505).  Michaelis  and  Eichhorn,  while 
contesting  the  integrity  of  the  book  (see  above  §  4,  note  1),  endeavored  to  establish  the  genu- 
ineness of  at  least  the  last  chapters.  Eichhorn  did  not  venture  to  assert  the  Maccabsean  origin 
of  the  whole  book  (in  the  3d  and  4th  ed.  of  his  EinJeitung),  and  consequently  its  forged 
character,  until  Corrodi  had  declared  it  to  be  wholly  the  work  of  an  impostor  of  the  times  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  f  in  his  FreimiUkigen  Veriuchen  uher  verschiedene  in  Tlieologie  und  hihl. 
Kritih  einsehlagende  Oegenstdnde.  Bertholdt  now  followed  with  his  sujjer-ingenious  mutilat- 
ing hypothesis,  which  was  wholly  based  on  the  assumption  of  forgery  (cf.  supra),  and  later, 
Griesinger,  Gesenius,  De  Wette,  Kirmss,  Redepenning,  Von  Lengerke,  Knobel,  Hitzig,  Stiihelin, 
Ililgenfeld,  and  others.  {  The  greatest  scientific  ability  and  judgment  in  contesting  the 
authenticity  of  this  book,  but,  at  the  same  time,  in  breaking  the  force  of  the  assaults  on  its 
integrity,  made  by  Berflioldt  and  Eichhorn,  was  displayed  by  Bleek.  §  The  more  recent 
deniers  of  the  genuineness  of  the  book,  with  but  few  exceptions,  agree  with  him  in  giving  up 
its  historical  character  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  and  in  assigning  it  to  the  Maccabsan  jjeriod, 
and  regarding  its  prophecies  as  vaticinia  ex  eveiitu — hence,  in  holding  essentially  the  same 
critical  position  which  was  occupied  by  Porphyry.  The  grounds  on  which  their  assertions 
are  based  are  partly  internal  and  partU' external  in  their  nature.  They  are  drawn  in  part  from 
the  place  of  the  book  in  the  canon  and  its  relation  to  the  later  Jewish  apocryphal  literature, 
and  in  part  from  its  peculiarities  of  language,  the  asserted  mythical  character  of  its  historical 
part,  the  chronological  difficuldes  which  it  is  said  to  present,  and  the  apocalyptical  character 
of  its  prophecies.  In  the  following  section  we  shall  engage  in  a  more  detailed  examination 
of  these  arguments,  and  in  that  connection  find  opportunity  to  become  acquainted  with  the 
substantial  and  enduring  services  of  the  more  recent  defenders  of  the  genuineness  of  the  book. 
Among  tliem  belong,  of  Protestants,  Liiderwald,  Stiiudlin,  Beckhaus,  Hengstenberg,  Haver- 
nick,  Keil,  Auberlen,  Delitzsch,  Ziindel,  Volck,  Kranichfeld,  Pusey,  Fuller,  and  others ;  of 
Roman  Catholics,  .Jalin,  Hug,  Herbst,  Scholz,  Speil,  Reusch,  and  others.  !| 

*  Cf.  Wolf.  Libl.  BebraicOy  II.,  p.  161 :  Bertholdt,  ae  cited  above ;  and  especially  as  affecting  Newton's  position  on  the 

qnestion  of  Daniel,  the  instructive  article  "  Is.  Newton "'  by  B t,  in  Jlichaud's  Biographie  univeraeUe,  torn.  XXX.,  p. 

397  Es. 

t  Cf.  also  Beleurhtnng  der  GescMchte  des  Kanon,  I.  75  et  seq. ;  and  Kritiache  Geschichte  des  Chiiiasmus,  I.  247  et  seq., 
by  the  same  author. 

t  Griesinger,  Xeue  Geschichte  der  Attf^dtze  im  Buck  Daniel,  1S12:  Gesenius,  Atlgem.  Literaturzeituiig,  1S16.  Xos.  5T 
end  SO ;  De  Wette,  Eiuteicung  inJt.  A.  T.,  ^  255  et  seq. ;  Kirmss,  Commeutatio  historico-crilica,  exhibens  descriptionem  el 
cemura-n  recenttiim  de  Dantelit  libra  opintonum,  Jena.  1850;  Redepenning,  Theol.  Studien  und  Krinken,  1833,  p.  S.31  ei 
Beq. :  18.35.  p.  1R3  et  seq. :  Von  Lengerke,  Das  Bitch  Dtrniel,  1S35 ;  Knobel,  Prnphetiamus  der  Hebrder,  II.  389  et  seq. ; 
Hitzip.  Knr-cgef.  ereget.  Handbitchzu  Daniel,  1850:  Suihelin.  Spesielle  Einleitung  in  die  kanrm.  BB.  des  A.  Test.,  1SG2; 
Hilpenfeld.  Die  jiidiKhP  Apokaluptik,  1S57.  Compare  also  Dillmann,  Veber  die  Bildnng  der  Sammlung  heiliger  Schrifteti 
A.  Tests.,  in  the  Jaftrbiicherfiir  deutsrhe  Theologie,  1858,  p.  458  et  seq.  ;  Kahnis,  Lather.  Dagmatik,  I.  p.  369  et  seq, ;  Th. 
N'Jldeke,  Dlealttestamentl.  Literntur  in  einer  Reihe  von  Avfsiilsen  dargestellt  (Leipsic.  1868).  p.  216  et  seq. ;  R.  Baxmann, 
Ueber  das  B.  Daniel,  Studien  und  ICritlken,  1863,  p.  452  et  seq.  {against  Ziindel) ;  and  Davidson,  Introd.  to  the  Ola  Test., 
vol.  III.,  p.  200  ss. 

§  reber  Terfasser  und  Zweck  des  B.  Daniel,  in  the  Thenl.  ZeitschHfl  of  Schleiermacher,  De  Wette.  and  Liicfce.  1822,  III. 
171  et  seq.  Further,  Die  Messianischen  Wetssagungen  im  Buche  Daniel  (Review  of  Auberlen's  work)  in  the  Jahrbilclier 
far  deulsche  Theologie,  1S60,  I.  ;  and  Einl.  ins  A.  T.,  |  254  et  seq. 

I  Liiderwald.  Die  sechs  ersten  Kapitel  Daniels  nach  historiscJun  Grilnden  gepruft,  Helmstadt,  1787  (against  Eichhorn, 
let  ed.) ;  Stiiudlin.  Prii/ung  eintger  Meinungen  tiher  den  Vrsprnng  des  B.  Daniel,  in  den  Xeuen  Beitnigen  i>ir  Erliiuter 
ung  der  Propheten,  Gottingen,  1791  (specially  against  Corrodi) ;  Beckhaus,  Die  IntegrUat  der  prophetischen  Schriften,  p 
279  et  seq. :  Hengstenberg,  Beitr.  zur  Einl.  I. ;  Die  Autheruie  des  Daniel  und  die  Integrittlt  cles  Sacharja,  Berlin,  1&31 ; 
Hivemick.  Eommentar  iiber  d.  Bxich  Daniel,  18.32;  Neue  krit.  Untersuchung  fiber  d.  Buck  Daniel,  1838;  Einleitung  im 
A.  T..  II.  9.  p.  444  et  .seq. ;  Keil,  Einl.  %  1.35  et  seq.  ;  Anberlen.  Der  Prophet  Daniel  und  die  OJTenbarung  Johannis.  Basis. 
18S4  :  2d  ed..  1857 :  F.  Delitzsch.  in  Herzog's  Real-Encycklop..  .\rt.  Daniel  (III.  271  et  seq.) ;  W.  Volck.  Vindicim  Danieilax, 
Dorpat,  1866 ;  David  Ziindel.  Kritische  Vntersuehnng  liWr  die  Abfnssung.izeit  des  Burhes  Daniel,  Basle,  1S51 ;  Kranich. 
tald.  Der  Prophet  Daniel.  Berlin.  1868,  p.  6  ot  seq.;  E.  a  Pusey,  Daniel  th£  prophet,  Oxford,  1S64;  J.  XI.  Fuller,  jln  mm» 


22  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

§  6.  Authenticity  of  the  Book  (Continued), 
b.  Examination  of  the  bxteknal  reasons  against  the  genuineness  of  Daniel. 

Among  the  external  grounds  on  which  opponents  are  accustomed  to  contest  tlie  origin  ol 
(tie  book  with  Daniel,  its  position  among  the  Hagiograplia,  in  the  third  and  last  part  of  the 
Hebrew  canon,  generally  forms  tlicir  chief  reliance.  That  this  fact,  so  suspicious  at  first  sight, 
is  by  no  means  inexplicable,  but  rather  has  its  adequate  explanation  in  the  peculiar  prophetic 
character  of  Daniel  and  his  writings,  as  well  as  in  the  composition  of  the  book,  partly  in 
Hebrew  and  partly  in  Chaldee,  has  already  been  shown  (§  1,  particularly  notes  2  and  3,  and 
also  §  2,  note  3).  We  confine  ourselves  in  this  place  to  the  suggestion  tliat  possibly  the  times 
of  severe  trial  and  of  conflict  with  anti-Christian  powers,  which  the  prophet  of  the  exile  fore- 
told to  his  people,  might  seem  to  the  scribes  of  the  centuries  succeeding  the  cajjtivity  to  pre- 
sent too  great  a  contrast  to  the  subjects  of  the  other  prophets,  who  dwelt  chiefly  on  the 
prospects  of  deliverance  that  should  come  to  the  people  of  God ;  and  that,  consequently,  they 
hesitated  to  acknowledge  the  full  canonical  value  of  this  book, — in  like  manner  as  they  ques- 
tioned the  canonical  autliority  of  Ecclesiastes  during  an  extended  period,  through  the  influence 
of  their  optimistic  hopes  for  the  future  (compare  note  1).  The  book,  however,  is  classed  with 
the  other  three  greater  prophets  in  the  Septuagint ;  but  the  conclusion  that  it  originally 
occupied  this  position  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  as  well  (so  Herbst,  Speil,  and  others  contend)  does 
not  necessarily  follow.  Rather,  the  framere  of  the  Hebrew  canon  seem  to  have  attached 
greater  importance  to  the  literary  and  lingual  peculiarities  of  the  book  than  to  anything  else, 
and,  for  this  reason,  to  have  regarded  its  separation  from  the  prophetical  literature  in  the 
narrower  sense,  as  necessary,  however  much  they  might  recognize  in  it  the  genuine  work  of  a 
prophet  living  under  the  exile.* 

That  the  Ijook  was  in  fact  so  recognized  appears  highly  probable,  in  view  of  the  manifold 
references  to  its  declarations  in  the  later  prophetic  writings  and  in  several  of  the  Old-Testa- 
ment apocrypha.  Among  the  prophets  after  the  captivity,  whose  reference  to  Daniel  is  utterly 
denied  by  Bleek,  Zechariah  at  least  seems  to  betray  an  acquaintance  with  the  prophecies  of 
Daniel,  Iiis  apocalyptic  model  and  predecessor,  particularly  in  the  vision  of  the  four  horns 
(chap.  ii.  1),  and  in  that  of  the  four  chariots  (chap.  vi.  1),  which  are  referred  by  several 
expositors  to  the  four  world-kingdoms  of  Daniel ;  further,  in  chajj.  xi.  8,  where  the  three 
shepherds,  who  should  be  cut  off  in  one  month  by  the  Lord,  are  possibly  a  symbolizing  of  the 
first  three  world-kingdoms  of  Daniel,  and  of  their  overthrow  in  rapid  succession  (compare 

on  the  authenticiti^  nf  the  hooJ:  of  Daniel^  Cambridere,  1864.  J.  Jahn,  Euil.  ina  A,  Tes;.,  II.  624et  seq. ;  L.  Hug,  Ze/;«c/>n/< 
fir  das  ErzhPit/Dim  Freilmrg,  VI.  150  ;  Herljst,  Elul.  mil  Zumlz  by  Welte,  II.  2,  p.  SO  et  seq.  ;  Scholz.  Einl.  III.  489  et 
peq. :  S[)eil.  De  libri  Ditnielifs  aiithentia,  Oppolii.  ISfiO,  and  Zur  Ecfuheit  des  B.  Daniel,  in  the  Tub,  Theot.  QuartalHchrifty 
1863.  p.  101  et  seq.  ;  Reusch,  Einl.,  3d  cd..  p.  Ill  et  seq. 

*  [We  may  remark  here,  once  for  all.  that  a  simpler  reason  for  the  position  of  Daniel  among  the  Hagiographa  rather 
than  among  the  Prophets,  seems  to  be  the  fact  that  the  author  was  not  a  prophet  in  the  strictly  technical  sense  of  the 
ter.Tl :  i.e.,  like  John  the  Baptist  (John  x.  41).  he  wrought  no  miracles,  and  his  predictions  were  not  directly  inspired,  but 
only  given  mediately  through  angels  or  dreams,  like  those  of  Joseph  (Gen.  xli.  15,  16).  Keil  thus  expresses  it:  "The 
place  occupied  by  this  book  in  the  Hebrew  canon  perfectly  corresponds  \vith  the  place  of  Daniel  in  the  theocracy.  Daniel 
did  not  labor,  as  the  rest  of  the  prophets  did  whose  writings  form  the  class  of  the  Xebiy'tn,  as  a  prophet  among  his  people 
in  the  congregation  of  Israel,  but  he  was  a  minister  of  state  under  the  Chjildiean  and  Medo- Persian  world-rulers.  Although, 
like  David  and  Solomon,  he  possessed  the  gift  of  prophecy,  and  therefore  was  called  itpo^tJttj?  ( Sept.  Josephns,  N.  T.),  yet  he 
was  not  a  i<''~r.  i.e.,  a  prophet  in  his  official  position  and  standing.  Therefore  his  book,  in  its  contents  and  form,  is  differ- 
ent from  the  writings  of  the  Nebty'iv.  His  prophecies  are  not  prophetical  discourses  addressed  to  Israel  or  the  nations,  but 
Tlsions,  in  whii  h  the  development  of  the  world-kingdoms  and  their  relation  to  the  kingdom  of  God  are  unveiled,  and  the 
historical  part  of  his  book  descrihos  events  of  the  time  when  Israel  went  into  captivity  among  the  heathen.  For  these 
rejvons  his  book  is  not  placed  in  the  class  of  the  Nebiij'tn,  which  reaches  from  Joshua  to  Malachi. — for  these,  according  tc 
tte  \-:ew  of  him  who  arranged  the  canon,  are  wholly  the  writings  of  such  as  held  the  prophetic  office,  i.e.,  the  office  requir- 
ing them  openly,  by  word  of  month  and  by  writing,  to  announce  the  word  of  God, — but  in  the  class  of  the  Kethubin,  which 
comjirehends  sacred  writings  of  different  kinds,  whose  common  character  consists  in  this,  that  their  authors  did  not  fill  the 
propnetic  office,  as,  e.g.,  Jonah  in  the  theocracy ;  which  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah  are 
comprehended  in  this  class,  since  Jeremiah  uttered  these  Lamentations  over  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  Judah  not 
a^  a  prophet  but  as  a  member  of  that  nation  which  was  chastened  by  the  Lord"  (Cointnentari/  on  Dan.,  Introd.,  p.  39,  30^ 
EillDl).  tS.).] 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DA>"IEL.  23 

Dote  2).  Among  the.  Apocrypha — aside  from  uncertain  analogies,  such  as  exist  between 
Wlsd.  v*17  and  Dan.  vil.  18,  27;  Wisd.  xiv.  16  and  Dan.  iii. — at  least  1  Mace.  i.  57  ("  Aboni 
inatlon  of  desolation,"  cf.  Dan.  ix.  27)  and  ii.  59  et  seq.  (the  deliverance  of  Hananiah 
Mishael,  and  Azariah  from  the  fiery  furnace,  and  of  Daniel  from  the  lion's  den ;  cf .  Dan.  iii. 
16  et  seq.  ;  vi.  21  et  seq.),  and  still  more  the  book  of  Baruch,  may  be  regarded  as  unquestion- 
able witnesses  for  the  canonical  dignity  of  our  book  in  pre-Maccabaean  times.  Tlie  analogies 
to  the  prayer  of  Daniel  (Dan.  ix.),  which  the  latter  l)ook  presents  in  chap.  ii.  (especially  vs.  6, 

11,  15,  19),  and  its  references  to  Nebuchadnezzar  and  to  "Belshazzar  his  son,"  in  chap.  i.  11, 

12,  are  the  more  important  and  unquestionable  as  proof,  because  the  Hebrew  original,  which 
we  are  compelled  to  receive,  indicates  with  tolerable  certainty  the  origin  of  this  book  in  pre- 
Maccabfeau  times,  and  probably  as  early  as  the  fourth  century  B.  C.  Under  these  circumstances, 
the  fact  that  Ecclesiasticus,  whose  Hebrew  original  likewise  indicates  its  composition  before 
the  period  of  the  Maccabees,  contains  no  definite  allusions  to  Daniel,  and  especially  that  his 
name  is  not  mentioned  in  its  enumeration  (chap,  xlix.)  of  Israel's  great  religious  heroes,  which 
includes  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  is  of  no  considerable  importance. 
This  feature  may  be  regarded  as  ])urely  accidental,  and  the  rather,  as  the  immediate  context 
(chap.  xlix.  13  et  seq.)  mentions  Zerubbaljel,  Joshua,  and  Nehemiah  among  the  great  men  of 
the  time  immediately  after  the  exile,  but  omits  tlie  name  of  Ezra;  as  many  of  the  prominent 
champions  of  Israel  are  not  included  in  tlie  remarkable  list  beginning  with  chap,  xlv.,  e.g., 
Joseph,  Gideon,  Samson,  Jehoshaphat,  etc. ;  and  finally,  as  tlie  silence  of  Ecclus.  in  regard  to 
Daniel  "  is  more  than  balanced  by  his  mention  in  Ezek.  xiv.  and  xx^aii."  (Reusch,  p.  112  ;  cf. 
Bupra,  §  2,  note  2).  Moreover,  the  words  iKaaToi  (iva.  KaTtcrriafv  fjyovfiffov  in  Ecclus.  xvii.  17 
probably  contain  an  allusion  to  the  angelology  of  Daniel,  and  are  to  be  explained  in  accord- 
ance with  Dan.  x.  13,  20;  xii.  1  (Havernick,  £1)1!.  II.  2,  p.  451).  Concerning  the  SyhiUine 
Oracles  as  an  esjjecially  important  source  of  proofs  for  the  authenticity  of  Daniel,  see 
note  3. 

Tlie  passage  in  the  Jewish  Antiquities  of  Josephus,  Book  XI.  chap.  8,  which  relates  that, 
among  othei-s,  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  were  shown  by  the  Jewish  priests  to  Alexiinder  the 
Great,  on  the  occasion  of  his  visit  to  Jerusalem,  and  that  he  was  greatly  pleased  by  the  oracle 
respecting  tlie  overthrow  of  the  Persian  dynasty,  which  so  clearly  referred  to  him,  might  con- 
stitute an  important  testimony  for  the  genuineness  of  this  book,  or  for  its  origin  during  the 
exile  ;  but  many  embellishments  and  internal  improbabilities  seem  to  lower  the  value  of  this 
tradition  to  a  degree  that  forbids  the  definite  conclusion  that  the  statement  concerning  the 
book  of  Daniel  is  to  be  included  in  the  genuine  liistorical  kernel  of  this  incident,  the  essential 
truth  of  which,  however,  is  indicated  by  various  considerations  (e.g.  the  noteworthy  and  cer- 
tainly historical  statement  that,  at  the  request  of  the  high-priest,  Alexander  granted  immunity 
from  taxation  to  the  Jews  during  every  seventh  or  fallow  year).  So  much  the  more  decisive 
is  the  testimony  of  the  Kew  Testament  in  support  of  the  inspired  character  of  the  book  and 
of  the  prophetic  dignity  of  its  author,  which  occurs  in  the  familiar  reference  of  Our  Lord  to 
Daniel  ix.  27,  in  his  great  eschatological  discourse  (Matt.  xxiv.  15  :  vrm  ovv  Xhjjrf  to  ffSiXvyi^a 

rfji  tprj^oifreoii  to  pr)^fp  dla  AavirfX  rnv  tt  ft  n(})  tj  to  v  fVros-  fV  roVo)  dytca — 6  dvayLvuiaKoiv 
i/ofirco,  etc.),  and  which  is  paralleled  by  other  unmistakable  allusions  to  Daniel's  expressions 
in  the  discourses  of  Our  Lord.  Among  these  we  reckon  the  constantly  rejieated  designation 
of  himself  as  "  the  Sou  of  Man,"  the  adoption  of  which  phrase  from  Dan.  vii.  13  is  open  to  no 
serious  objection,  while  its  identity  with  Daniel's  SjS  ^3  is  unmistakaljly  revealed,  especially 
in  prophetic  descriptions,  such  as  Matt.  xix.  28  ;  xxiv.  30  ;  xxvi.  64.  The  prophecy  concern- 
ing the  resurrection  of  the  good  and  the  evil,  in  John  v.  28,  29,  like\>'ise,  is  clearly  based  on 
chap.  xii.  2,  3,  of  this  book.  Among  the  numerous  allusions  to  our  prophet  which  are  found 
in  the  writings  of  the  Apostles,  we  instance  merely  2  Thess.  ii.  3  et  seq.  ;  1  Pet.  i.  10-12  (cf. 
Dan.  iii.  and  vi.),  and  the  Apocalypse,  which  latter  book  is  based  throughout  on  the  prophe- 
cies of  Daniel,  and  therefore  vouches,  with  its  entire  contents,  for  the  Divinely  inspired  and 
canonical  character  of  this  book. 

Note  1 .— Kranichfeld,  p.  8  et  seq.,  explains  in  a  striking  manner  to  what  extent  the  peculiar 


£4-  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

theological,  or  rather  eschatological,  character  of  Daniel's  prophecies  may  have  been  influential 
in  retarding  their  admission  into  the  canon  during  the  pre-Maccabsean  period  :  "  The  proph- 
ecies of  Daniel,  in  contrast  with  the  oracles  of  earlier  prophets,  foretell  a  period  of  severe 
tribulation  iu  the  future,  which  the  sufferings  of  the  exile  have  not  warded  off;  and  they  pre- 
dict this  far  more  constantly,  positively,  and  directly  than  does  the  book  of  Zechariah,  or  any 
prophecy  of  the  pel  iod  succeeding  the  captivity,  the  aim  of  the  latter  being  chiefly  to  comfort 
and  encourage  the  returned  exiles  in  their  discouraging  circumstances.  There  was  thus  a 
Bufficitnt  reason,  in  the  character  of  the  book  itself,  to  warrant  its  being  received  with  caution 
by  the  age  succeeding  the  exile,  and  even  to  justify  the  temporary  ignoring  of  its  claims  ;  for, 
on  the  one  hand,  it  contradicted  the  sentiment  of  that  age,  which  indulged  in  exalted  hopes 
of  deliverance  based  on  the  older  prophecies,  and,  on  the  other,  it  had  emanated  from  one  who 
was  not  even  a  prophet  by  a  specific  call.  A  similar  treatment  appears  to  have  been  accorded 
to  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes  during  an  extended  period,  which  likewise  resulted  from  its  con- 
tents, although  differing  extremely  from  those  of  Daniel.  In  the  Asmonsean  period,  however, 
the  impression  produced  by  the  religious  and  political  events  which  illustrated  its  projihecies, 
secured  the  book  a  ready  reception  into  the  canon,  although  it  was  excluded  from  the  second 
part  of  ^he  sacred  writings,  which  had  proliably  been  closed  for  centuries,  and  was  limited  by 
traditional  usage.  This  simple  explanation,  which  removes  every  difficulty  in  relation  to  the 
l>lace  of  the  book  in  the  canon,  is  not  contradicted  by  the  remark  of  Josephus  {Contra  Apion, 
I.  S)  concerning  the  closing  of  the  canon  in  tlie  time  of  Artaxerxcs,  which  is,  in  the  main, 
correct.  That  statement,  as  Keil  correctly  observes  (Einl.  §  154),  refers  to  the  time  of  the 
composition  of  the  sacred  wntings,  in  hamiony  with  the  fact  that  neither  Ecclesiasticus  nor 
1  Maccabees  (which  were  composed  only  two  centuries  before  Christ)  found  a  place  in  the 
canon;  but  it  does  not  preclude  the  subsequent  conclusion  of  the  collecting  and  receiving  into 
the  third  section  of  the  canon  of  older  sacred  writings."  Similar  views  are  advanced,  so  far 
as  the  last  question  is  concerned,  by  Hengstenberg,  Beitr.  I.  23  et  seq.,  and  Ziindel,  Krit. 
Uniersuchnngen,  p.  196  et  seq..  214  et  seq.     Also  compare  below,  §  10. 

Note  2. — Among  older  expositors,  Jerome,  Abarbanel,  Kimchi,  and  Drusius,  refer  Zechari- 
ah's  visious  of  the  four  horns  (ii.  1),  etc..  and  of  the  four  chariots  (vi.  1  et  seq.),  to  the  world- 
kingdoms  of  Daniel,  as  do  Baumgarten  {Kdclitgesichte  dfs  Sachnrja),  Ziindel  (Kritisc/ie  Unter- 
suchungen,  249),  Pusey  (Daniel,  p.  357),  Fiiller,  Kliefoth,  and  W.  Volck  (Vindiciw,  Daiiielicas, 
p.  3  et  secj.),  among  modems;  while  Kohler  (Nache-rilische  Prophiten,  ii.  1)  and  a  majority  of 
later  expositors  deny  the  fact  of  such  a  relation.  Koliler,  however,  {ihid.,  II.  p.  138)  agrees 
with  Von  Hofmann,  Elirard,  Kliefoth,  Ziindel,  and  Volck  (I.  c,  p.  26)  in  referring  the  "three 
sliej)herds,"  Zech.  xi.  8,  to  the  first  three  world-kingdoms,  and  assumes,  in  addition,  a  relation 
of  the  prophecy  against  Javan,  Zech.  ix.  13,  to  Dan.  viii.  8  et  seq.  But  the  correspondence  of 
these  latter  passages,  if  it  is  to  be  accepted  at  all,  is  of  minor  importance,  because  the  chapters 
Zech.  ix.-xi.  jjossibly  originated  with  a  prophet  Zechariah,  who  flourished  before  the  exile, 
and  therefore  may  be  older  than  the  Daniel  of  the  captivity.  Compare,  however,  the  argu- 
ments adduced  to  the  contrary  by  Hengstenberg,  Beit):  I.  366  et  seq.  ;  also  by  the  editor  of 
this  Bible-work,  in  vol.  I.  of  the  Old  Test.,  p.  44  [Am.  ed.]. 

Note  3. — In  relation  to  the  references  in  Ecclesiasticus  to  Daniel,  see  Ziindel,  p.  188;  and 
the  same,  p.  191  et  seq.,  concerning  the  much  clearer  and  more  important  references  in  the 
book  of  Barueh.  where  the  opinion  of  Dillmann,  as  stated  in  his  essay  on  the  formation  of  the 
Old-Test,  cnnon  {Jahrhh.  f.  deutsche  Theol,  1858,  p.  480),  is  quoted:  "  The  book  of  Barueh, 
by  no  means  a  contemptible  after-piece  of  prophetical  literature,  may  have  been  in  circulation 
in  its  Hebrew  form  as  early  as  the  fourth  century  B.  C.  ;  "  and  where,  at  the  same  time,  it  is 
shown  most  clearly  that  the  pseudo-Baruch  was  undeniably  acquainted  with  the  book  of 
Daniel,  and  imitated  many  of  its  features,  particularly  the  prophet's  prayer,  Dan.  ix.  Heng- 
stenberg, p.  288  et  seq.,  Havemick,  Einl.  II.  2,  459  et  seq.,  and  Pusey,  in  his  Commentary,  p. 
370,  show  that  the  echoes  of  this  liook  found  in  1  Maccabees  (which  are  so  clear  and  unmis- 
takable, that  scholars  like  Bleek,  De  Wette,  and  Grimm  [on  1  Mace.  i.  57]  have  acknowledged 
this  occurrence)  are  entitled,  despite  the  composition  of  the  book  toward  the  close  of  the 
second  century  B.  C,  to  rank  as  indirect  testimonies  for  the  origin  of  Daniel  prior  to  the 
Asmonaian  period.  Concerning  Ecclus.  and  its  omission  of  Daniel  from  the  i'tivtit  Traripaiv, 
chapters  xliv.-l.,  see  Havernick,  p.  451  et  seq.  ;  Herbst,  Einl.  II.  2,  88;  Keil,  Einl.,  p.  452; 
Hengstenberg,  p.  21  sq.  ;  Ki-auichfeld,  p.  10,  etc.  Some  of  these  writers,  however  (e.g., 
Havemick,  Keil,  Hengstenberg,  together  with  Brctschneider  and  otliers),  go  too  far  when  they 
reject  the  passage,  chap.  xlix.  12,  as  not  genuine,  and  thus  exclude  all  mention  of  the  twelve 
minor  projjhets  as  well ;  for  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  to  sU3i)ect  that  verse  on  critical 
grounds  (cf.  Bleek,  Einl.,  p.  589).  It  has  been  pointed  out.  especially  by  Havernick  (Einl. 
1.  c,  p.  457  et  seq.)  and  Ziindel  (p.  173  et  seq.  ;  ef.  p.  140  et  seq.),  that  the  Alexandrian  ver- 
sion of  the  Old  Testament  in  general,  and  of  Daniel  in  jiarticular  (cf.  infra.  §  11),  which 
jjroliably  origin.ated  in  the  second  century  B.  C,  reveals  many  traces  of  the  existence  of  onf 
prophetical  book  prior  to  the  Maccabtean  age;  that,  for  instance,  its  rendering  of  Dent,  xxxii. 
8,  vrt  thfutfji^^if  u  inl'WTn^  l^vTj,  tcTrjotv  bpia  ii^vuv  Kara  apt-i^uov  fljj^/w?'  i?fo(',  seems  to  rest  on  Dan. 
X  1-^   20.  like  the  ruMamffe.  Ecclus.  ivii.  17,  which  is  cited  above;  and  that  citations  from  its 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  25 

version  of  Daniel  occur  in  the  first  booli  of  Maccabees  (1.  57),  as  well  as  in  the  SiVjylliue 
oracles  (iii.  396,  613,  etc.)  ;  facts  tliat  argue  with  great  force  the  origin  of  this  Greek  version 
in  tlie  Asnion;ean  period,  and  tlierefore,  at  the  very  time  to  which  the  negative  criticism 
assigns  tlie  original  Daniel  itself.  The  testimonies  drawn  from  the  Apocryplia  are,  -ndth  rare 
exceptions,  surpassed  in  importance  and  evidential  force  by  the  agreement  of  the  Sibyllines 
with  Daniel,  since  tlie  unanimous  consent  of  competent  scholars,  such  as  Bleek,  Liicke,  Fried- 
lieb,  and  otliers,  ascriljes  the  composition  of  the  portion  of  the  Oracula  tSibyllhia  in  question 
(lib.  III.,  V.  35-746)  to  an  Alexandrian  Jew,  and  dates  it  in  the  first  Iialf  of  tlie  second  cen- 
tury, or,  more  probably,  about  100  B.  C.  The  correspondence  of  many  of  these  verses  to 
passages  in  our  prophetical  book,  or  rather  in  its  Alexandrian  version,  cannot  be  questioned; 
and  the  suppositioB  ventured  by  Bleek,  that  both  (pseudo-Daniel  and  the  pseudo-Sibyllines) 
sprang  from  a  common  source  of  a  more  ancient  time,  is  merely  an  arbitrary  evasion  to  hide 
his  embarrassment.     Compare  SibylL,  lib.  III.,  v.  396  ss.  :  'Pi^av  lav  ye  6i6ovT,  >r-'  «ii  noipm  $finTo- 

'/.oiyo^,     'Ek  6tKa  drj  Kepdrijv  irapa  6fj  ipvrov  u?.'/.o  tpvTevact ttal  t6t£  dij  7rafia<i)v6/i£vov  KEpa^ 

apict,  with  the  Sept.  at  Dan.  vii.  7,  8,  11,  30; — also  Sihyll..  III.  613:  T^avra  6i  cv^nOTpa  aal  ndvra 
KaKojit  ava-'Ariaii,  with  Sept.,  Dan.  vii.  23,  24. 

Note  4. — Hengstenberg  (p.  258  etseq.,  277etscq.)  is  especially  thorough  and  profound  in  his 
examination  of  the  testimony  of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  and  of  Josephus  in  A)it.,  XI.  8,  5.  He 
may  attempt  too  much  in  seeking  to  establish  the  historical  character  of  all  the  details  connected 
with  the  perhaps  somewhat  legendary  narrative  respecting  the  incident  by  which  Alexander 
became  acquainted  with  Daniel's  prophecies ;  but  his  statements  convey  the  decided  impres- 
sion that  the  narrative  in  question  is  not  a  pure  invention  ■vvithout  any  foundation  in  fact. 
He  quotes,  on  page  288,  the  significant  judgment  of  H.  Leo  respecting  the  credibility  of  this 
account  (as  expressed  in  his  VorUsu/igen  iiher  die  Geschichte  des  jiidUch-eii  Volis,  p.  200,  which, 
as  is  well  known,  breathe  anything  rather  than  a  believing  spirit):  "The  entire  narrative 
contains  nothing  that  is  really  improbable.  An  armed  resistance  on  the  part  of  the  high-priest 
would  have  been  madness ;  he  may  therefore  have  gone  out  to  meet  Alexander  in  peace.  It  is 
also  well  known  that  Alexander  sought  to  impress  the  Asiatic  world  with  tlie  belief  that  he  was 
in  league  with  the  gods  of  the  nations  whom  he  had  conquered.  It  has  been  considered 
improliable  that  Alexander  should  not  liave  hastened  from  Gaza  directly  to  Egypt ;  but  to  go 
from  Gaza  to  Egypt  by  way  of  .Jerusalem  involved  at  most  an  additional  journey  of  a  few 
days,  and  Jud;iea  was  not  a  point  to  be  disregarded  in  an  expedition  to  Egypt.  It  would  be 
unwise  to  leave  this  mountain  region  in  the  rear,  in  the  possession  of  an  enemy."  See  also 
Ziindel,  p.  238  et  seq.,  where  the  hypercritical  objection  of  Hitzig,  "The  book  was  not  pro- 
duced, and 'if  it  had  existed  at  the  time,  it  would  certainly  have  been  shown"  {Ueidelherger 
Jahrh.,  1832.  II.,  p.  235),  is  justly  regarded  as  an  indirect  testimony  for  the  trustworthiness  of 
the  account  by  Josephus. 

§  7.  Authenticity  op  the  Book  (Continued). 

c.  Examination  of  the   intern.vl   reasons  against  its  genuineness,  and   moi'e  particularly  of 
those  derived  from  peculiarities  of  langiinge  and  style. 

It  has  already  been  repeatedly  shown  that  the  lingual  structure  of  this  book — the  transition 
into  Chaldee,  chap.  ii.  4,  the  essential  identity  of  this  idiom  with  the  Chaldee  of  Ezra,  the 
Hebraisms  and  Parseeisms  contained  in  it,  and  finally,  the  marked  Chaldaizing  tendency  of 
the  Hebrew  poi-tions,  similar  to  the  style  of  Ezekiel — that  all  this  corresponds  fully  witli  the 
assumption  of  an  author  who  flourished  at  the  Chaldsean  court  of  Babylon,  and  who  was  of 
Jewish  birth,  but  educated  in  the  customs  and  wisdom  of  the  Chalda?ans  (see  §  1,  note  3,  and 
§  4,  note  2).  It  is  only  necessary,  in  this  connection,  to  refer  to  the  Greek  expressions,  which 
have  been  regarded  as  proving  the  later  origin  of  the  work  in  an  especially  decisive  way. 
Bertholdt  was  still  able  to  enumerate  ten  such  expressions,  but  the  more  recent  ojiponents  of 
the  genuineness  of  the  book  find  the  number  reduced  to  three  or  four,  as  the  result  of  a  care- 
ful word-criticism.  All  of  these  are  names  of  musical  instruments,  such  as  miglit  easily  have 
been  introduced  at  Babylon  by  commercial  intercourse,  even  prior  to  the  exile.  They  com- 
prise the  terms  V^;n3DB=:i/'a/.77)fK0i',  nVB>aiD  =  CTiy/i4wW«,  Di'n.n"'ip  =  Mi9n/j;r,  and  8<r3p=  (TO/i/irK;?, 
all  of  which  occur  in  the  history  of  Daniel's  friends  and  the  fiery  furnace  (ch.ap.  iii.  5,  7,  10, 
15).  But  even  among  these  the  third  is  possibly  of  Oriental  origin,  and  the  last  almost  cer- 
.tainly  so.  The  aa/i  vki/  or  CaiiuvKi/  (also  'la/iivKy)  of  the  Greek  was,  according  to  AtheniEua 
(Deipnosoph.  iv.  183;  xiv.  634),  a  Syrian  invention,  and  the  Shemitic  «2aa  (related  to  "^^O^ 
"to  interweave")  se  ms  therefore  to  be  the  primitive  form,  from  whii  h  the  Gr;ecizcd  atr  //iat, 
«  derived,     m*""';;  may  possibly  be  the  Persian  Si-tareh,  "  six-stringed,"  and  may  stand 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


related  to  'niSapi^,  which  is  to  be  derived  from  the  same  source,  as  a  sister  rather  than  as  a 
mother.  Pareau,  Hengstenberg,  Havemick,  Haneberg,  and  others,  have  even  attempted  to 
trace  the  two  remaining  terms  to  a  Shemitic  source,  and  have  accordingly  derived  ""^^ciio 
from  r]^D,  "  a  reed,  and  V''^'^^  from  OB,  "  a  hand,"  and  "ir:,  "  to  leap  "  (therefore,  "  strings 
that  are  plaj'ed  by  hand  ").  But  excessive  difficulties  stand  in  the  way  of  such  an  etymology, 
particularly  the  Greek  sound  in  the  endings  of  the  two  words  (pnr^wC  seems  to  be  singular 
rather  than  plural),  and  the  circumstance  that  m/Kpuvla,  if  not  fa'/XTtpiov,  occurs  in  the  classics 
as  the  name  of  an  instrument,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  passage  Polyb.  Fragm.,  31,  t.  4,  and  as 
may  be  concluded  from  the  Italian  designation  of  the  bagpipe,  znmhogna  er  sampogna,  which 
is  proljably  derived  from  that  source.  On  the  other  hand,  the  assumption  that  the  instruments 
of  the  Greeks  were  in  use  among  the  Chalda>ans  early  in  the  sixth  century  B.  C,  or  even  in  the 
seventh  and  eighth,  involves  no  difficulty  whatever.  It  would  seem  strange,  rather,  if  no  traces 
of  commercial  intercourse  with  the  Greeks  at  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  B.  C.  were 
found  in  Babylon,  the  primitive  "city  of  merchants"  (Ezek.  xvii.  4,  12;  of.  Josh.  vii.  21), 
since  the  Assyrian  kings  Esar-haddon,  Sargon,  and  Sennacherib  were  involved  in  either 
friendly  or  hostile  relations  wth  the  Greeks  of  Asia  Minor,  as  early  as  the  eighth  century  B  C. 
Further,  "Javan"  is  mentioned  in  tlie  cuneiform  inscriptions  of  Sargon  among  the  nations 
who  were  tributary  to  Assyria ;  according  to  Strabo,  xiii.  3,  2,  a  Greek,  the  brother  of  the 
poet  Alcajus,  served  in  the  armies  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  a  mercenary,  or,  more  probably,  as  the 
leader  of  a  band  of  Greek  mercenaries ;  the  Ionian  philosopher,  Auaximander,  displays  con- 
siderable knowledge  of  the  Orient  in  his  map  of  the  world,  which  was  prepared  in  the  same 
period  ;  and  finally,  commercial  relations  of  considerable  importance  were  maintained  be- 
tween the  lands  of  the  Euphrates  and  the  Greek  colonies  of  Asia  Minor,  certainly  in  the  eighth 
century  B.  C,  and  possibly,  through  Phoenician  channels,  as  early  as  the  days  of  Homer  (see 
notes  1  and  2). 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  no  unanswerable  objection  against  the  origin  of  this  book  during 
the  period  of  the  captivity  can  be  established  on  the  ground  of  its  peculiarities  of  language; 
nor  do  the  remaining  literary  peculiarities,  such  as  the  method  in  which  the  prophet  refers  to 
himself  and  his  personal  relations,  afford  the  slightest  reason  to  doubt  its  composition  by 
Daniel.  "The  honorable  references  to  Daniel  (chap.  i.  17,  19;  v.  11  et  seq.  ;  vi.  4  ;  ix.  23; 
X.  11)  are  analogous  to  many  expressions  employed  by  the  Apostle  Paul  concerning  himself, 
e.g.,  1  Cor.  xv.  10  ;  2  Cor.  xi.  5  et  seq. ;  xii.  2  et  seq. ;  and  they  are  necessary,  either  to  com- 
plete the  historical  representation,  as  in  the  case  of  the  predicate  '  greatly  beloved,'  applied 
to  him  by  the  angel  in  chap.  ix.  23  ;  x.  11,  or  in  the  honorable  mention  of  his  name  to  Bel- 
shazzar  by  the  queen,  chap.  v.  11,  12  ;  or  they  belong  to  25assages  which  aim  to  honor  God, 
who  had  endowed  his  servant  with  miraculous  wisdom  (i.  17  et  seq.  ;  vi.  4).  Consequentlj', 
they  contain  no  trace  of  Pelagian  self-laudation  which  could  militate  against  the  opinion  that 
the  book  which  bears  his  name  was  composed  by  himself  "  (Keil,  Einl.,  p.  452  sq.). — Nor 
does  the  religiously  moral  deportment  of  the  prophet,  as  it  is  described  by  himself  in  this 
book,  afford  a  proof  in  any  other  direction  against  its  composition  in  the  period  of  the  exile. 
His  custom  of  observing  three  seasons  of  daily  prayer,  as  mentioned  in  chap.  vi.  11,  his  fre- 
quent fasts  (chap.  ix.  3  ;  x.  3,  12),  and  the  strict  abstinence  from  profane  food  of  himself  and 
his  youtliful  friends  (chap.  i.  8  et  seq.),  do  not  necessarily  indicate  a  period  sul)sequent  to  the 
exile,  and  even  as  late  as  that  of  the  Asmouaeans,  as  is  abundantly  shown  by  passages  lika 
Psa.  Iv.  18 ;  Ezra  viii.  21  ct  seq. ;  ix.  3  et  seq. ;  Nell.  i.  4  ;  ix.  1 ;  Zech.  vii.  3 ;  viii.  19 ;  Hos. 
ix.  3,  4;  Ezek.  xxii.  26  ;  xliv.  23;  xxxiii.  25,  etc.  His  dogmatic  position  no  more  requires  an 
explanation  based  on  the  condition  or  experiences  of  God's  people  after  the  exile,  than  such 
ascetic  habits,  or  the  exalted  value,  which,  according  to  chap.  ii.  18;  ix.  3;  x.  2  et  seq.,  he 
attaches  to  prayer  and  intercession,  oblige  us  to  regard  him  as  involved  in  the  narrow-minded 
legal  and  work-righteous  conceptions  of  tlie  latgr  .ludaism.  His  description  of  the  Messiah 
and  his  kingdom — in  contrast  witli  the  apocryphal  literature  of  the  period  after  the  captivity, 
from  which  Messianic  ideas  and  hopes  are  almost  entirely  wanting — is  intimately  related  to 
the  predictions  of  the  older  prophets,  and  especially  of  Isaiali  (cf.  Isa.  ix.  4  et  seq.  with  Dan. 
vii.  13  sq.).    The  relation  between  the  expected  founding  of  Messiah's  kingdom  and  the  gen- 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DAXIEL.  27 

eral  resurrection  of  the  dead,  ■which  he  indicates  in  chap.  xii.  2  et  seq.,  corresponds  to  tka 
older  prophetic  descriptions  in  Isa.  xxiv. ;  Ixvi.  22-24 ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.,  but  finds  no  analogy  in 
the  later  apocryphal  literature,  unless  we  except  2  Mace.  vii.  9  et  seq  ,  which  passage,  however, 
is  probably  based  on  Dan.  xii.  as  its  model.  Nor  does  the  angelology  of  the  book  present 
any  specific  feature  which  points  to  a  period  later  than  the  exile ;  much  less  does  it  indicate 
that  its  teachings  result  from  the  influence  of  the  religious  thought  of  Persia  on  Judaism. 
Rather,  they  are  closely  related,  on  the  one  hand,  to  the  angelology  of  Ezekiel  and  Zechariab 
fcf.,  e.g.,  Ezek.  ix.  10  ;  also  i.  26,  and  Zech.  i.-vi.),  and,  on  the  other,  they  are  rooted  in  the 
much  older  views  and  experiences  of  the  time  before  the  exile  ;  e.g.,  the  idea  of  protecting 
spirits  of  single  states  is  founded  in  Isa.  xxiv.  21  ;  that  concerning  princes  of  the  angels 
(chap.  X.  13,  20 ;  xii.  1),  doubtless  in  the  familiar  account  in  the  book  of  Joshua  respecting 
the  "captain  of  the  Lord's  host"  (Josh.  14).  Therefore,  in  this  direction  also,  the  literary 
character  of  the  book  reveals  nothing  that  indicates  an  anti-Daniel  or  a  pseudo-Daniel  (cf. 
note  3). 

Note  1. — Delitzsch  observes,  p.  274,  on  the  relationship  of  the  Hebrew  of  Daniel  to  that  of 
Ezekiel,  that  '•the  Hebrew  of  this  book  is  closely  related  especially  to  that  of  Ezekiel,  whose 
book  may  b;'.  and  doubtless  is,  included  among  the  D^-tO  in  chajj.  ix.  2 ;  and  it  is  a  surpris- 
ing accident  that  it  conforms  somewhat  to  Habakkuk  also,  whom  tradition  associates  with 
Daniel."'  The  following  expressions  are  adduced  in  support  of  the  former  correspondence,  Ijy 
Haveinick  {N.  Irit.  Vnterss.,  p.  97  et  seq.)  and  Keil  {Eiul.,  p.  446)  :  the  vocative  n^N  1?,  chap, 
viii.  17  ;  ~nt,  brightness,  xii.  3,  cf.  Ezek.  viii.  2;  -^n,  to  render  liable  to  penalty,  i.  10,  and 
2in,  debt,  Ezek.  xviii.  7 ;  3r3  for  IpO,  x.  21,  cf.  Ezek.  xiii.  9  ;  C'^'^S  =12b,  s.  5,  cf.  Ezek.  ix 
8,  3;  3?~S,  royal  food,  i.  5,  and  33,  food,  Ezek.  xxv.  27;  bio,  polished,  x.  6,  cf.  Ezek.  i.  7, 
etc.  With  reference  to  the  relation  of  the  Aramaic  of  Daniel  to  that  of  Ezra,  and  to  the 
Chaldee  of  the  Targums  of  a  later  age,  consult  Havernick  and  Keil,  as  above,  and  cf.  supra, 
§  1,  note  3.  It  is  the  peculiar  merit  of  Pusey  to  have  established,  in  his  profoundly  learned 
commentary,  tlie  high  antiquity  of  the  Chaldaism  of  Daniel,  in  compari.son  with  that  of  the 
Targums  and  the  rabbins,  by  his  examination  of  numerous  individual  forms,  and  especially 
of  the  many  asserted  Hebraisms  of  this  book. 

Note  2. — On  the  question  whetlier  the  musical  instruments  of  the  Greeks  may  have  been 
known  to  the  Babylonians,  and  even  to  the  Assyrian;?,  consult  Delitzsch,  p.  274  ;  Auberlen, 
p.  12  et  seq.  ;  Kranielifeld,  p.  48  et  seq.,  and  the  passage  cited  by  the  two  former  from  Joh. 
Brandis,  JJiher  den  filstur.  Gewinii  ana  der  EnUifferung  der  assyrischen  Inschriften,  1856,  p.  1 
et  seq.,  where  the  observation  is  made,  in  relation  to  the  commercial  intercourse  of  the  ancient 
Greeks,  that  "  the  extended  commerce  of  the  Greek  colonies  would  frequently  lead  their  mer- 
chants to  Assyrian  countries,  since  they  penetrated  even  to  the  inhospitable  steppes  ou  the 
Dnieper  and  the  Don.  Their  niost  important  enterprises  were  probably  connected  with  the 
Assyrian  provinces  of  Asia  Minor,  and  above  all  with  the  countries  on  the  coasts  of  Pontus 
and  alung  the  Jlediterranean  Sea,  doubtless  including  Lydia  also,  where  the  Assyrian  .suprem- 
acy seems  to  have  been  maintained  during  more  than  five  hundred  years,  and  almost  to  the 
close  of  the  eighth  century  B.  C.  These  nations  must  also  have  met  in  Cyprus,  where  the 
Greeks  traded  at  an  early  period,  and  where  the  Assyrians  had  firmly  established  themselves. 
We  aie  obliged  to  be  content  with  a  supposition  that  Greeks  came  as  far  as  Assyria  proper,  in 
the  capacity  of  merchants ;  but  Greek  soldiers  certainly  accompanied  Esar-haddon,  the  first 
among  the  Assyrian  rulers  to  form  a  corps  of  mercenaries  (Abydenus  inEuseb.,  Chron.  Armen., 
ed.  Aucher  I.,  p.  .53).  on  his  marches  tlirough  Asia,"  etc.  Comijare  also  the  interesting  work 
by  Brandis,  Z*!!*  Hum-,  Mass-  vnd  Gewichtsweaen  in  Vorderasun  his  mif  Aleinndfr  d.  Gr.,  1867. 
Respecting  the  Greeks  as  the  musicians  kut'  (^•ix'i''  iu  the  world,  see  Auberlen,  as  above : 
"  Attention  may  also  be  directed  to  the  fact  that  the  Greeks,  as  the  patrons  of  art,  occu- 
pied a  position  in  the  ancient  world  similar  to  that  conceded  to  the  Italians  in  the  modem; 
and  how  many  are  the  musical  terms  which  we  Germans  have  adopted  from  the  Italians ! 
Poetry  and  music  flourished  at  fir.st  precisely  among  the  Greeks  of  Asia  Minor,  and  prior  to 
the  nintli  century  B.  C,  about  the  middle  of  which  Homer  lived  there,  according  to  the  not 
improbable  statement  of  Herodotus  (II.  .53).  Greek  artists  were  employed  by  the  Lydians. 
among  whom  music  was  likewise  cultivated,  so  that  the  Greeks  adopted  the  Lydian  key  from 
them.  But  Lydia  was  not  merely  dependent  on  Assyria  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  down  to 
the  close  of  the  eighth  century,  but  afterward  maintained  intimate  relations  with  Babylon,"  etc. 
Concerning  the  \//iiXt^()ioi'  or  Pesantrrin.  com'pare,  in  addition,  tlie  remark  of  Kranielifeld  :  "  It 
may  be  oliserved.  iu  relation  to  the  oljjection  that  the  \j/iiATr')/ii..i/  is  mentioned  only  by  latei 
writers  among  the  Greeks,  that  tho  argumcntum  cr  silentio  raised,  on  tliat  ground,  against  the 
earlier  existence  of  that  instrument,  is  sutficiently  met  by  the  probable  representation  of  a 


28  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PEOPHET  DANIEL. 

yj/nXrrjpioi'  on  the  monuments  of  Sennacherib,  cf.  Layard,  Nineveh  and  Bahylon,  c.  20,  p.  454, 
The  persons  who  there  welcome  tlie  Assyrian  leaders  with  dances,  songs,  and  plays,  are  pre- 
ceded by  five  musicians,  three  of  whom  carry  harps  ■with  many  strings,  a  fourth  has  a  double 
flute,  and  the  fifth  is  furnished  with  an  instrument  which  Layard  comjjares  to  the  Santer  oi 
Egypt  =  p^riJDD  (Gresenius,  Thes.,  p.  1116).  It  consists  of  a  number  of  strings  which  are 
stretched  on  a  resonant  frame,  and  corresponds  to  the  description  of  the  psalterium  f urnisbed 
by  Augustine  (on  Psa.  xxxii.)." 

Note  3. — -With  reference  to  the  feasibility  of  reconciling  the  religious-ethical  representations 
of  this  book  with  the  hypothesis  of  its  origin  during  the  captivity,  see  Heugstenberg,  p.  137 
et  seq. ;  Hiivernick,  Neiie  l-rit.  Unterss.,  p.  32  et  seq. ;  and  Oehler  in  Tholuck's  Litfrarischer 
Ameiger,  1843,  Nos.  49  and  50,  and  particularly  p.  888  et  seq.  The  dependence  of  Daniel's 
angelology  on  that  of  Zoroaster  has  been  frequently  asserted,  since  it  was  first  stated  by 
Gesenius,  Bertholdt,  Winer,  and  others ;  but  Martin  Haug,  of  Bombay,  decidedly  advocates 
the  opinion,  in  his  Essays  on  the  Sacred  Language,  Writings,  and  Jieligioti  of  ths  Parsces  (Bom- 
bay, 1862),  that  the  religious  development  of  Judaism  was  independent  of  that  of  Parseeism, 
without,  on  that  account,  attempting  to  deny  to  them  a  common  source,  as  an  explanation  of 
their  manifold  analogies  (compare  Ausland,  1862,  p.  937  ;  1865,  p.  1079  et  seq.).  The  simple 
circumstance  that  a  scholar  so  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  Zend  religion  and  literature, 
should  hold  to  this  opinion,  may  serve  as  a  warning  to  receive  with  caution  such  views  of 
their  relations  as  are  al>ove  referred  to.  The  opinion  of  Max  JluUer,  as  expressed  in  his 
philosophical  meditations  on  religion  {Chips  from  a  German  Worlshop,  London,  1867), 
agrees  fully  with  tliat  of  Haug  ;  while  E.  Renan  {De  V  Origine  du  Language,  p.  230  ;  Vie  de 
Jesus',  p.  15  s.)  and  Fr.  Spiegel  (Genesis  und  A-oesta,  in  Ausland,  1868,  No.  12  et  seq.)  assert  a 
direct  adoption  from  the  religious  writings  of  the  ancient  Persians  of  many  theological  and 
angelological  conceptions  by  the  later  Judaism  after  the  time  of  the  Achremenidoe.  Ililgen- 
feld  also  (Das  Judenthxim  im  persischen  Zeitalter  in  the  Zeitschrift/ur  icissenschaftl.  Theologie, 

1866,  No.  4,  p.  398  et  seq.)  and  Alex.  Kohut,  JJeher  die  jiidische  Angelologie  und  Ddmoiwlogie 
in  ihrer  Ahhiingigheit  vom  Parsismus  (taken  from  the  Zeitschrift  der  deutsrh-mvrgenl.  Gesellsch., 
Vol.  IV.,  No.  3)  Leipsic,  1866,  advocate  the  same  view.  But  the  sober  investigations  of  men 
of  the  most  diverse  tendencies  agree  in  reaching  substantially  the  same  result,  namely,  proving 
that  at  most  a  few  names  of  angels  remain  to  a  profounder  and  more  unprejudiced  criticism, 
as  elements  of  the  Jewish  angelology  which  are  really  derived  from  Parseeism,  and  that  even 
these  names  are  not  chiefly  of  Aryan,  but  of  Shemitic  and  even  genuinely  Heljrew  origin — as 
is  especially  true  of  those  found  in  Daniel  (Michael  and  Gabriel).  Compare  Heuss  (Histoire 
de  la  theologie  Chretienne  au  Sieel-e  apostolique,  I.,  93  et  seq.),  Dillmann  (Jahrhh.  fiir  de.utsche 
Theologie,  1858,  p.  419  et  seq.),  Hiivernick  (Vorll.  iiher  die  Theologie  des  A.  Ts.,  2d  ed.,  pub- 
lished by  H.  Schultz,  p.  92  et  seq.  ;  118  et  seq.) ;  Hofmann  (Schri/theweis,  I.  281,  291  et  seq.) ; 
A.  Kohler  (A'achexilische  P-opf<eten,  II.  2'd  et  seq.);  Haneberg  (in  Reusch,  Theol.  Literaturhl., 

1867,  No.  3,  p.  72).  See  the  exegetical  notes  on  chap.  viii.  10, 15,  and  compare  the  instructive 
treatise  of  Erich  Haupt,  UeJier  die  Beriihrungen  des  A.  Ts.  mit  der  Religion  Zarathustra''s 
(Treptow  on  the  Rhine,  1867),  which  argues  positively  against  the  adoption  from  Parseeism  of 
any  religious  conceptions  whatever  in  the  canonical  portions  of  the  O.  T. 

§  8.  AtJTHENTiciTT  OF  THE  BooK  (Continued), 
d.    Examination    of   the    internal    evidences    against    its    genuineness,    iased   on    HiSTORiCAIi 

DIFFICULTIES. 

The  charges  raised  against  the  book  of  Daniel,  on  the  ground  of  asserted  contradictions  of 
the  accounts  of  extra-biblical  history  respecting  the  Babylonian  and  Medo-Persian  kingdoms, 
are  either  Uistorico-social  in  their  nature,  or  politico-historical.  They  relate  either  to  the 
antiquities  of  those  kingdoms,  or  to  their  chronological  relations  and  changes  of  dynasties. 

1.  The  former  class  of  difiiculties,  namely  those  affecting  the  social  progress  and  customs  of 
the  times,  lie  within  the  domain  of  the  history  of  civilization  and  morals.  They  arise  from  the 
deportment  of  Neb\ichadnezzar  and  Belshazzar  toward  the  oneirocritical  magicians  on  the  one 
hand,  and  toward  Daniel  on  the  other  (chaps,  ii.  and  v.) ;  further,  from  the  colossal  size  and 
ugliness  of  the  image  which  was  to  be  worshipped,  and  from  the  cruelty  of  the  punishment 
im))osed  on  the  friends  of  Daniel,  because  of  their  refusal  to  obey  the  decree  which  required 
such  worship  (chap,  iii.) ;  from  the  lycanthropy  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  not  substantiated  by 
extra- biblical  historians  (chap,  iv.) ;  from  the  alleged  incredibility  of  the  statement  that  king 
Darius  issued  a  decree  ordaining  that  divine  honors  should  be  paid  exclusively  to  him ;  and 
from  the  assumed  funnel-like  shape  of  the  lion's  den  into  which  Daniel  was  thrown  (cliap.  vi.) 
All  of  these  difficulties  are  merely  such  in  appearance.     An  observer  who  understands  the 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  29 

spirit  of  the  aucient  as  ivell  as  the  niodeni  Oriental  despotism  (of  w.iich  the  case  of  Theodore 
o.f  Abyssinia,  with  his  whims  and  fluctuating  views,  may  serve  as  a  late  example),  and  esp& 
cially  who  at  the  same  time  remembers  the  tendency  of  the  Babylonian  and  Medo- Persian 
rulers  to  syncretistic  arbitrariness  and  mingling  of  religions,  will  not  deem  it  strange  that 
Neljuchadnezzar  should  address  to  his  magicians  the  unreasonable  demand,  not  merely  to 
interpret  his  dream,  but  even  to  recall  its  contents,  which  wore  forgotten  by  him,  and  that  ha 
should  condemn  them  to  death  when  they  failed  to  satisfy  his  demands,  while  he  rewarded 
Daniel,  who  accomplished  the  task,  with  the  highest  honors  and  emoluments.  Such  an  obser- 
ver will  not  be  surprised  to  find  the  king,  in  chap,  iii.,  directing  a  monstrous  idolatrous 
demonstration  against  the  God  of  Daniel  and  his  friends,  and  consigning  the  latter  to  so 
glorious  a  martyrdom;  nor  to  behold,  in  chap,  v.,  the  striking  contrast  between  the  blas- 
phemous insults  and  excesses  of  Belshazzar  at  the  first,  and  the  favor  afterward  bestowed  by 
him  on  Daniel ;  nor  yet,  in  chap,  vi.,  the  similar  change  in  the  disposition  of  Darius  as 
revealed  in  his  conduct.  That,  Ijy  Divine  retribution,  the  arbitrary  and  passionate  temper  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  should  develop  into  madness,  and  result  in  the  infliction,  during  several 
years,  of  a  mental  disorder  of  the  most  terrible  nature,  is  no  more  surjirising  than  are  any  of 
tlie  various  cases  of  lycanthropy  recorded  in  the  annals  of  psychiatry,  among  whicli  that  of 
the  Armenian  king,  Tiridates  III.,  is  the  most  familiar  and  historically  important.  Traces  of 
this  awful  episode  in  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  although  not  found  in  other  historians  of 
aucient  times,  may  yet  l)e  shown  with  sufficient  clearness  in  the  Babylonian  Berosus  and  in 
Abydenus  (see  note  1).  With  regard  to  the  less  important  details  which  have  e.xcited  criti- 
cism, as  being  legendary  or  at  least  suspicious,  it  may  be  observed  that  the  description  of  the 
idol  in  the  plain  of  Dura  (chap.  iii.  1  et  seq.),  which  reached  a  height  of  sixty  cubits,  cor- 
responds substantially  with  the  descriptions  transmitted  through  other  channels  of  uncoutli 
colossal  images,  such  as  the  coarse  and  excessively  fanciful  art  of  ancient  Oriental  heathendom 
was  accustomed  to  erect  to  the  honor  of  its  gods.  The  non-appearance  of  Daniel  and  the 
other  magians  before  Belshazzar  (chap.  v.  7)  is  sufficiently  explained  by  the  Oriental  custom 
of  removing  the  priests  from  oflice  with  every  change  of  rulers.  The  decree  of  Darius,  limit- 
ing the  ascription  of  divine  honors  during  an  entire  month  to  himself  (chap.  vi.  8  et  seq.) 
agrees  fully  witli  the  statements  of  Herodotus,  Xenophon,  and  Plutarch,  respecting  the  deify- 
ing of  kings  among  the  ancient  Medes  and  Persians.  And  finally,  the  designation  of  the  lion's 
den  by  313  or  Sail  (chap.  vi.  8,  18)  does  not  necessitate  the  view  that  it  was  "a  funnel-shaped 
cavern  or  cistern,"  since  the  term  in  question  is  applied  in  the  Syriac,  not  merely  to  dungeons, 
but  also  especially  to  the  dens  or  cages  of  wild  beasts  (cf.  the  exegetical  remarks  on  the 
several  passages  cited  in  tliis  connection). 

2.  The  following  difficulties  and  alleged  contradictions  or  anachronisms  belong  to  the 
domain  of  political  history  and  chronology  : 

(1.)  According  to  the  statement  in  chap.  i.  1,  that  "In  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim  came 
(SI)  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  unto  Jerusalem  and  besieged  it,"  our  book  seems  to 
place  the  first  siege  and  cajiture  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  as  early  as  the  third  year  of 
Jehnidlcim.  This  contradicts  Jer.  xxv.  1,  9  (cf.  xlvi.  2;  xxxvi.  9),  where  the  arrival  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  before  Jerusalem  appears  to  be  placed  in  the  fourth  or  even  the  fifth  year  of 
Jehoiakim's  reign  ;  and  it  also  conflicts  with  Dan.  ii.  1,  where  the  second  year  of  Neljuchad- 
nezzar  is  given  as  the  time  in  which  Daniel  interpreted  the  monarch's  dream,  and  thus 
attained  to  great  distinction,  whereas  the  conquest  of  Juda-a  and  the  transportation  of  Daniel 
and  his  friends,  together  with  other  prisoners,  to  Babylon,  and  the  instruction  of  the  Hebrew 
youth  (according  to  chap.  i.  5,  18)  during  three  years  in  the  wisdom  of  the  C'haldteans,  all 
transpired  several  years  before.  The  only  adequate  solution  of  this  two-fold  difficulty  is 
found  in  the  hypothesis,  that  Dan.  i.  1  does  not  relate  the  arrival  of  Nebucliadnezzar  before 
Jerusalem,  Init  merely  his  departure  for  that  place,  or  the  beginning  of  his  march  (^Tg  as  in 
Jon.  i.  3;  cf.  Gen.  xiv.  .5;  xlv.  7;  Dan.  xi.  13,  17,  38);  and  also  that  the  designation  of 
Nebucliadnezzar  as  king,  in  chap.  i.  1,  3,  5,  is  to  be  regarded  as  proleptical,  his  position  at 
that  time  l)eing  that  of  a  military  leader  and  representative  of  his  father  Nabopolassar,  while 
his  accession  to  the  throne  was  delayed  about  two  years  later.     From  this  hypothesis  result* 


30  IXTEODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

an  mterval  of  more  than  three  years  between  the  removal  of  Daniel  to  Babylon,  and  hil 
elevation  to  the  headship  of  the  magian  caste  (see  note  2). 

(2.)  According  to  chap,  v.,  Belshazzar  seems  to  be  the  successor,  or,  at  least,  one  of  the 
successors,  of  liis  father  Nebuchadnezzar  on  the  throne  of  Babylon,  while  ver.  30  represents 
liim  as  the  last  ruler  before  the  introduction  of  the  Medo-Persian  dynasty.  The  extra-biblical 
authorities,  however,  mention  four  kings  of  his  family  who  succeeded  Nebuchadnezzar  (Evil- 
nierodach,  Neriglissar,  Laborasoarchad,  and  Nabonidus),  none  of  whom  bears  the  name  of 
Belshazzar.  Of  the  two  methods  possible  for  the  solution  of  this  difficulty,  the  one  identifies 
Belshazzar  with  Evil-merodach,  and  the  other  with  Nabonidus.  The  former  is  the  more 
probable  one,  because  the  relation  of  chap.  vi.  1,  to  v.  30  by  no  means  requires  that  the  sub- 
jection of  Babylon  to  the  Medo-Persians  should  have  iminediattly  followed  on  the  death  of 
Belshazzar  ;  and  further,  because  Nebucliadnezzar  is  mentioned  as  the  father  of  Belshazzar  in 
chap,  vii.,  while  the  profane  sources  call  Evil-merodach  a  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  but  not 
Nabonidus,  the  last  Chaldsean  king  (see  note  3).  Moreover,  the  two  years  of  the  reign  of 
Evil-merodach,  mentioned  in  Jer.  lii.  31,  may  be  easily  reconciled  with  the  statement  in  Dan. 
viii.  1,  that  a  vision  was  seen  by  Daniel  "in  the  third  year  of  Belshazzar;  "  for  it  might  be 
said  that  Belshazzar-Evil-merodach  reigned  two  years  even  if  he  lived  until  about  the  middle 
of  his  "  third  year."  * 

(S.)  It  is  said  that  chap.  vi.  1  implies  that  the  monarch  who  overthrew  the  Chaldsan 
dynasty,  and  established  the  Medo-Persian  rule  in  Babylon,  was  not  Cyrus,  but  '•  Darius  the 
Mede."  But  since,  according  to  chap.  \\.  29  (cf.  i.  21),  the  author  had  knowledge  of  Cyrus 
as  the  successor  of  this  Darius,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  by  the  latter  name  he  designates 
the  Cyaxeres  II.  of  Xenophon,  who  was  the  son  of  Astyages  and  uncle  of  Cyrus,  and  conse- 
quently the  sovereign  whose  reign,  according  to  ^schylus,  Xenophon,  Abydenus,  and  Jose- 
phus,  intervened  between  the  last  Jlcdian  king  Astyages  and  the  founding  of  the  Persian 
AcViaemenideau  dynasty  by  Cyrus.  It  follows,  that  the  narrative  of  Herodotus,  which  relates 
that  Cyrus  defeated  his  Median  grandfather  Astyages  near  Pasargarda;,  and  became  his  imme- 
diate successor,  has  its  source  in  an  inexact  or  incomplete  tradition,  from  whence  the  father  of 
history  derived  his  facts  in  relation  to  the  Persian  as  well  as  the  Babylonian  kingdom  (see 
note  4). 

Note  1. — With  reference  to  the  mention  of  diseases  and  the  actual  occurrence  of  lycan- 
thro|iy.  compare  generally  Bartholinus,  De  morJiis  hiblicis,  c.  13  ;  Rich.  3Iead,  Mfdica  sacra, 
c.  7;  J.  n.  Miiller,  Diss,  de  Nihiichndnfznris  fjeTatiofxpoiaft  ad  Dan.,  c.  iv..  Lips..  1747;  Freind, 
Historia  tucJic,  p.  380  (where  the  imjjortant  testimony  of  Oriljasius,  physician  to  the  emperor 
Julian,  is  given,  showing  the  occurrtnce  of  this  disease  in  his  time) ;  Forcstus,  Obserrationes 

•  [A  better  Polution  of  the  difficult}-  is  proposed  by  R^iwlinson  {Herodotus,  i.  494,  Am.  ed.),  as  being  suggested  by  the 
recently  discovered  inscriptions  on  the  Babylonian  monuments.  "According  to  Berosus,  Nabonadius  was  not  in  Babylon, 
but  at  Borsippa,  at  the  time  when  Babylon  was  taken,  having  fled  to  that  comparatively  unimportivnt  city  when  his  .army 
was  defeated  in  the  field  (ajnid  Joseph,.  Contra  Apinji,  i.  211.  He  seems,  however,  to  have  left  in  Babylon  a  repre.senta- 
tive  in  the  person  of  his  son.  whom  a  few  years  previously  he  had  as.sociated  with  him  in  the  government.  This  prince, 
whose  n.'ime  is  read  as  BU-shnr-uzur,  and  who  may  be  identified  as  the  Belshazzar  of  Daniel,  appears  to  have  taken  the 
command  in  the  city  when  Xabonadius  throw  himself  for  some  unexplained  reason  into  Borsippa.  which  was  undoubtedly 
n  strong  fortress,  and  was  also  one  of  the  chief  seats  of  Chaldiean  learning,  but  which  a.ssuredly  coulti  not  compare,  either 
for  macnificence  or  for  strength,  with  Babylon,  and  Belshazzar,  who  was  probably  a  mere  youth,  left  to  enjoy  the  supreme 
power  without  check  or  control,  neglected  the  duty  of  w-atching  the  enemy,  and  gave  himself  up  to  enjoyment."  '"Two 
difficulties  stand  in  the  way  of  this  identification,  which  (if  accepted)  solve  one  of  the  most  intricate  problems  of  ancient 
history.  The  first  is  the  relationship  in  which  the  Belshazzar  of  Scripture  stands  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  which  is  throughout 
represented  as  that  of  son  (verses  *?,  11. 13,  18.  etc.) :  the  second  is  the  accession  immediately  of  '  Darius  the  Mede.'  With 
respect  to  the  first  of  these,  it  may  be  remarked  that  although  Nabonadius  was  not  a  descendant,  or  indeed  any  relative  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  Belshazzar  may  have  been,  and  very  probably  w-as.  Nabu-nahit.  on  seizing  the  supreme  power,  would 
naturally  seek  to  strengthen  his  position  by  marriage  with  a  daughter  of  the  great  k;ng,  w-hose  son,  son-in-law-,  and  grand- 
Ron  had  successively  held  the  throne.  He  may  have  taken  to  wife  Neriglissar's  widow,  or  he  may  have  married  pome  other 
daughter  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Belshazzar  may  thus  have  been  grandson  of  Nebuchadnezzar  on  the  mothn-'s  .fUle.  It  IB 
Bome  confirmation  of  these  probabilities  or  possibilities  to  find  that  the  name  of  Nebuchadnezzar  w-as  used  as  a  family 
name  by  Nahn-nahit.  He  must  certainly  have  had  a  son  to  whom  he  gave  that  appellation,  or  it  would  not  have  been 
4Psi:mod  by  two  pretenders  in  succession,  w-ho  sought  to  personate  the  legitimate  heir  to  the  Babylonian  throne."  Th« 
•ccond  obje<-tion,  respecting  the  immediate  succession  of  "  Darius  the  Mede."  is  elsewhere  considered,  and  api'lies  not  par- 
ticvlarlf  to  this  identification.] 


AUTHENTICITY"  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  31 

medic,  X.  15  ;  Welcker,  AUgem.  Zeitschrift  fur  Psychiairie,  vol.  EX.,  No.  1  ;  Trusen,  SitUn, 
Get/rihtche,  und  Kranl-heite u  der  alien  Hehrder,  1853;  Reil,  Ehapsodien  iiber  die  Anwendang 
df.r  psydiischeii  Kurmethode  aiif  Geisteszerritttungen,  pp.  296,  336  et  seq.  Tlie  last  work  con- 
tains many  iiiterestmg  examples  of  insanit}',  in  which  the  patients  believed  themselves  trans- 
formed into  d'ists.  wolves,  bears,  cats,  etc.,  and  were  able  to  imitate  the  calls  of  those  animals 
with  surprising^  exactness.  Important  historical  examples  of  this  character  are :  Ljcaon 
(Pausan.,  VIII.  2;  Ovid,  MeUim.,  I.  210);  king  Tiridates  IIL  of  Armenia,  the  persecutor  of 
Greo-ory  the  illuminator  about  A.  D.  300  (Moses  of  Chorene,  Hist.  Armetiiaca,  1.  III.,  ed. 
Whiston,  p.  256  et  seq.  :  M.  Samueljan,  Bekehrvng  Armeniens  durch  Gregor.  lUumhiatvr,  nach 
nationaJ-historischen  Quellcn  hmrb.,  Vienna,  1844  ;  S.  C.  Malan,  The  Life  and  Times  of  S.  Greg- 
ory the  lUuminatoi;  the  Fminder  and  Patron  Saint  of  the  Armenian  Church,  I'ran^at&lfrorn  the 
Armenian,  London,  1868; — cf.  the  Basle  Missions-Magasin,  1832,  p.  530);  Latronianus,  a  per- 
secutor of  Christians  in  the  time  of  Diocletian,  who  was  temporarily  bestialized  because  of  liia 
cruelty  (see  the  acts  of  the  martyrs,  s.  vv.,  Epictetus  and  Astion_,  in  the  Acta  Sanct,  Jul.,  T.  IL 
p.  538)  ;  Simon  of  Tournay.  an  Aristotelian  philosopher  in  Paris  about  A.  D.  1200  (who  is 
said  to  have  received  a  roaring  voice  like  a  beast,  in  punishment  of  a  blasphemy  publicly 
uttered  against  Christ,  Moses,  and  Mohammed  ;•  see  Qc\\i-'6ck\-i,  Eirchengesch.,  vol.  XXVI.,  p. 
380)  ;  Simon  Brown,  an  Englisli  dissenting  minister,  1733  (who,  while  in  a  melancholy  state 
of  mind,  believed  liimself,  during  a  considerable  period,  to  be  changed  into  a  beast,  although 
in  other  respects  he  was  rational  and  in  the  possession  of  his  faculties :  see  Stiiudlin  and 
Tzschirner,  Archiv,  etc..  vol.  III.,  p.  562  et  seq.);  a  prince  of  Conde,  who  at  times  believed 
himself  transformed  into  a  dog  (Scliubert,  Symholik  des  Traums,  3d  ed.,  p.  166)  ;  an  English 
boy  at  Norwich,  .about  A.  D.  1603,  whose  disease  assumed  the  form  of  lycanthropy  (Reitz, 
Historic  der  Wiedergehorenen,  II.  56  et  seq.).  Compare  also  the  fabulous  accounts  of  were- 
wolves, i.e.,  persons  who  rage  witli  wolfish  cruelty  and  rapacity  against  their  fellow  men,  in 
Gorres,  Die  Christ!.  Mystik:  vol.  IV.  2.  p.  472  et  seq.  ;  also  Waitz,  Anthropologie  der  Natur- 
Tolker,  vol.  II.,  p.  180,  concerning  the  belief  of  the  African  nations  in  the  disease  maraflnus, 
i.e.,  lycanthropy.  Among  the  profane  testimonies  to  tlie  lycanthropy  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
that  of  the  inscripticms  on  tlie  Babylonian  monuments  (which,  so  far  as  they  date  back  to  that 
king,  indicate  the  interruption  of  his  great  l)uilding  enteri^rises  during  a  considerable  period  ; 
see  Rawlinson,  Bampton  Lectures,  V..  p.  166  and  p.  440,  n.  29),  is  not  sufficiently  positive  and 
clear.     The  statement  of  Berosus  (in  Josejihus,  Contra  Apion.  I.  20)  :   t\atlav)(ii&'ivu<Toimi  ^liv  otv 

^era    rn    itfj^na'int     rov    npftfLp-qfifVov    Tfi-)^ov*:,     ("/iTrffrwv     eti     dpjjtoaTialf,     p.fT7]X\ii^(iTO     Tnv     jiinv, 

^€ii(ia-iKfVK(os  (TTj  Tecra-fpaKiivTii  Tpia.  is  likewnse  very  indefinite,  and  leaves  room  for  the  opinion 
tliiit  it  refers  to  a  disease  not  at  all  unusual  in  its  character,  whicli  immediately  preceded  the 
death  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (although  tlie  mention  of  the  appuimia  which  preceded  his  death  can 
hardly  be  accidental  and  without  significance  with  Berosus,  whose  narrative  in  other  cases  is 
always  as  concise  as  possible.  Cf.  Kranichfeld  on  the  )jassage,  p.  204  et  seq.).  The  C'hald.'ean 
tradition  concerning  the  wonderful  close  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  life,  as  reported  by  Abydenus 
(in  Eussb,,  Praqiar.  Bcaiig..  IX.  41  ;  cf.  Chron.  Annen..  I.,  p.  59),  contains,  on  the  other  Imnd, 
a  positive  tdthough  frequently  clouded  and  distorted  testimony  to  that  fact.  It  states  that 
Nebuchadnezzar,  after  concluding  his  wars  of  conquest,  "  ascended  to  the  summit  of  his  royal 
palace,  where  he  was  seized  by  one  of  the  gods  "  iwn,  liwi/ins  fTri  rn  ^no-iXijiV?,  Karairxrftfirt  ifw 
ortoi  S^).  "  With  a  loud  voice  he  said,  •  I,  Nebuchadnezzar,  foretell  j'our  misfortune,  which 
neither  Bel,  my  ancestor,  nor  the  queen  Beltis,  can  prevail  on  the  fates  to  avert !  The  Persian 
mull'  shall  come,  being  in  league  with  your  own  gods,  and  shall  bring  you  into  bondage ;  the 
Mede.  tlie  pride  of  the  Assyrians,  shall  lie  his  helper'.  Would  that  a  whirlpool  or  a  flood 
(:(ii,)D3f^ii' Tii-.i  r)  SriXa.rrrafi  might  sweep  him  previously  away  and  utterly  destroy  him  I  Or 
that,  at  any  rate,  he  might  be  driven  by  other  ways  through  the  desert,  where  tliere  are  neither 
cities  nor  human  patlis.  but  where  only  wild  beasts  and  Ijiids  roam  about — that  he  might 
wander  in  solitude  among  rocks  and  precipices !  And  would  that  I  had  met  a  better  end 
before  this  knowledge  was  imparted  to  nie  ! '  After  this  prophecy  he  immediately  became 
invisible"  ('O  nev  'ifinriirus  nmnixpniJ-"  rirptifiiTTn).  We  have  here,  clearly,  a  specifically  Chal- 
diean  version  of  the  same  tradition,  whose  original  form  appears  in  Dan.  iv.  The  prophecy 
respecting  the  impending  overthrow  of  the  Chalda-an  kingdom  appears  to  have  been  taken 
from  the  mouth  of  the  Hebrew  prophet,  and  ascribed  to  the  great  king  himself,  as  being  sud- 
denly overwlielmed  by  the  gods  (as  a  "30^,  cf.  Jer.  xxix.  20;  2  Kings  ix.  11).  The  banish- 
ment of  the  king  wliile  controlled  by  a  bestializing  mania  is  represented  as  a  mysterious  dis- 
apiJearance  ;  and  the  popular  tradition  seeks  to  escape  the  typical  allusion  to  the  humiliation 
and  punishuient  of  the  proud  Cliald.'ean  kingdom,  which  is  conveyed  in  that  iusanitj' — in  that 
disgraceful,  though  temparary,  degradation  of  its  ruler,  by  invoking  the  fate  which  actually 
came  upon  Nebuchadnezzar,  on  the  head  of  the  Mi-do-Persian,  tlie  hated  national  foe.  The 
popular  wit  of  the  ancient  Orient.als,  which  deliglited  to  ridicule  Cyrus  as  the  n€^lI>r)t  >}iiioi/or 
(cf.  Herodotus  I.  55.  91 ),  may  have  been  not  altogether  without  influence  in  bringing  about 
this  peculiar  perversion,  or  rather  reversal,  of  the  original  prophec}',  as  is  suggested  by  a  com- 
parison of  Abydenus,  .as  quoted  above,  with  Dan.  v.  21  (T"~"15,  "a  wild  ass").     Compare 


iJ2  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

Hengstenb.,  p.  107  et  seq. ;  Havemick,  Neve  hrit.  Uiiterss.,  p.  52  et  seq.  ;  Kranichfeld,  pp.  203- 
J09  ;  Pusey,  p.  294  et  seq. 

Note  2 — The  most  simple  solution  of  tlie  historical  difficulty  in  chap.  i.  1,  and  that  which 
uas  the  greatest  exegetical  support,  has  been  indicated  above.  It  may  \>e  found  in  Perizonius, 
OrigiiKS  JEijyptincm  et  Baliylonica,  II.,  p.  430,  and  more  recently  in  Hengstenberg,  p.  54  et 
«oq.  ;  Delitzscb,  p.  275;  Keil,  EinL,  §  133,  p.  440;  and  substantially,  in  Kranichfeld,  p.  16  et 
4eq.  (but  cf.  infra.  No.  2).  It  regards  the  verb  sia  as  not  designating  the  arrival  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar before  Jerusalem,  but  as  merely  indicating  his  departure  from  Babylon  (for  the  feasi- 
oility  of  this  inter j)retati on  cf.  tlie  proof-texts  cited  above,  to  which  may  be  added  Num. 
vxxii.  6;  Isa.  vii.  24;  xxii.  15,  and  many  others ;  see  Gesenius  and  Dietrich  under  si2,  No. 
Si.  Further  incidents  in  the  campaign,  whose  beginning  is  thus  indicated  are:  the  victory  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  over  Pharaoh-Necho  near  Carchemish,  or  Circesium,  on  the  Euphrates  (an  event 
which,  according  to  Jev.  xlvi.  2,  transpired  in  the  course  of  thefmirth  year  of  Jelwialim) ;  the 
|)ursuit  of  tlie  defeated  Egyptians  by  the  Chalda;ans  in  a  southerly  direction  f  Jer.  x\\\.  5  et  seq.)  : 
the  arrival  of  the  ■s'ictor  before  Jerusalem,  and  the  taking  of  the  city,  which  followed  soon  after- 
wards (2  Kings  xxiv.  1  et  seq.  ;  2  Cliron.  xxxvi.  6  et  seq.),  and  probably  near  the  close  of  the  fourth 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  with  which  was  connected  the  first  deportation  of  captive  Jews,  and  of  a  por- 
tion of  the  vessels  of  the  temple,  to  Babylon.  In  the  following  year,  and  some  time  after  the 
departure  of  the  ChaldsBans,  the  fast  was  proclaimed,  of  which  Jeremiah  remarks  (xxxvi.  9) 
th^t  it  was  oljserved  in  the  ninth  month  of  tlie  fifth  year  of  Jehoiakim.  It  may  therefore,  in 
analogy  with  Zech.  viii.  19,  be  regarded  as  an  annivei'sary  of  mourning,  commemorative  of 
the  fall  of  the  city  in  the  preceding  year,  instead  of  being  considered  a  prophylactic,  peniten- 
tial fast,  designed  to  secure  deliverance  from  the  impending  danger  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
arrival,  and  thus  as  similar  to  those  described  in  Joel  i.  14;  2  Chron.  xx.  3,  4,  etc.  (as  Hitzig, 
Schmeidler.  and  others,  hold).  This  simple  and  natural  comljination  of  events  is  contradicted 
by  no  statement  whatever,  in  relation  to  the  history  of  Jehoiakim  and  his  time,  wliether  found 
in  this  or  auy  otlier  prophetical  or  historical  book.  The  passages  Dan  i.  2  and  2  Chron. 
xxxvi.  6  (Heb.  text)  do  not  actually  state  that  Jehoiakim  was  carried  to  Babylon  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar after  liis  capture  of  Judoea;  but  if  tliis  were  the  case,  their  statements  would  by  no 
means  conflict  witli  the  account  in  2  Kings  xxiv.  1,  according  to  which  Jehoiakim  became 
the  triliutaiy  of  Ncl^uchadnezzar  during  three  years  after  his  first  subjugation,  and  afterwards 
revolted  from  him  anew.  Neitlier  the  brief  sketch  in  Chronicles,  nor  tlie  subject  of  Daniel, 
which  is  not  specially  concerned  mth  the  fortunes  of  that  king,  would  require  the  mention  of 
the  return  of  Jehoiakim  to  his  capital  soon  after  his  transportation  (see  on  chap.  i.  2)  ;  and  in 
\'iew  of  his  undecided  character,  his  revolt,  after  three  years  of  vassalage,  may  be  readily 
acce|5ted,  despite  the  fact  that  he  had  felt  the  proud  Chaldsoan's  power  but  a  few  years  before. 
Nor  will  it  be  surprising  that  2  Kings  xxiv.  11  et  seq.  relates  another  taking  of  Jerusalem  and 
deportation  of  many  Jews  so  soon  after  the  first  as  the  reign  of  king  Jehoiachin  or  Jeconiah,  if  we 
regard  this  sc-cond  deportation  (6-7  years  later  than  the  first ;  cf.  2  Kings  xxiii.  36,  with  xxiv.  8) 
as  the  punisliment  which  Nebuchadnezzar  was  compelled  to  inflict  on  the  Jews,  because  of  Jclioi- 
akira's  revolt,  but  which  was  not  executed  until  some  time  after  it  was  decided  on,  and  thus 
affected  the  son  and  successor,  before  he  had  attained  his  majority,  instead  of  crushing  the  father 
(cf.  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  8-10).  Finally,  the  designation  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  I'ing  while  engaged  in 
his  campaign  against  Neclio  and  the  allied  Jehoiakim  (Dan.  i.  1), — while  the  successful  inter- 
jiretation  of  the  dream  by  Daniel,  which  transpired,  according  to  chap.  ii.  1,  in  the  second 
year  of  that  monarch's  reign — must  date  at  least  three  years  later,  involves  no  contradiction 
whatever,  if  we  regard  tlie  title  in  the  first  instance  as  proleptical.  There  would  Ije  no  impro- 
priety in  apjilyiug  it  to  him  as  joint  ruler  with  his  father  and  leader  of  his  armies,  even 
during  the  life  of  Nabopolassar,  —  especially  if  we  remember  that  Berosus  (in  Josejihus, 
contra  Apiiiii..  I.  19)  makes  Nebuchadnezzar  to  achieve  his  great  victories  over  the  "satraps'' 
of  Egypt.  Ccele-Syria,  and  Phoenicia,  before  tlie  death  of  the  aged  Nabopolassar,  and  to  has- 
ten to  Babylou  to  assume  the  sole  government,  only  after  receiving  the  tidings  of  his  father's 
death  (B.  C.  60-5  or  604,  and  soon  after  the  first  capture  of  Jerusalem).  Jer.  xxv.  1,  also,  in 
harmony  with  Dan.  i.  1,  when  correctly  understood,  represents  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim 
as  the  first  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign,  inasmuch  as  he  regards  the  leader  of  the  C'halda>aiis  as 
the  king  of  BabyltJU  after  his  victory  over  Necho,  whether  he  might  be  for  the  time  the  com- 
mander-in-chief and  co-regent,  and  also  the  prospective  successor  to  the  throne,  or  not.  But 
a  comparison  of  Jer.  lii.  31  with  2  Kings  xxv.  27  shows  clearly  that  this  jirophet  was  by  no 
means  unacquainted  with  the  correct  chronology  of  Neliuchadnezzar's  reign  (beginning  with 
the  death  of  Nabopolassar).  This  method  of  reconciling  Dan.  i.  1,  with  all  the  remaining 
data  afflicting  the  chronology,  is  so  satisfactory  in  all  respects,  that  we  are  led  to  reject  every 
other  combination  as  decidedly  as  we  do  the  course  of  the  negative  criticism  which  finds  the 
statements  of  this  book  in  general  to  conflict  with  history,  and  which,  therefore,  despairs 
cpeiiially  of  being  al)le  to  reconcile  the  jiassagc  chap.  i.  1  with  the  statements  in  Jeremiah, 
Kings,  and  Chronicles  (Bertholdt,  Kirniss,  Blcek,  De  Wette,  Hitzig,  etc.).  Among  the  method?' 
of  arrangement  whicli  differ  from  ours  we  reckon  : 

(1.)  The  account  of  Josephus  {Ant.,  X  6,  1),  which,  in  view  of  2  Kings  xxiv.  1  et  seq 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  33 

idmits  indeed  tliat  Nebuchadnezzar  possessed  all  the  territory  west  of  the  Eu])hrates  after  his 
victory  over  Necho,  but  fixes  the  conquest  of  Judsea  fully  three  or  four  years  later  (in  the  f<th 
year  of  Jehoiakim) ;  a  perversion  of  history  that  resulted  probal)ly  from  a  misundei-standing 
of  Jer.  xxii.  IS.  19,  and  against  which  Keil  and  Thenius  fon  2  Kings  in  many  places),  Hitzig, 
Graf,  Hasse  (D'' ^'rima  JVebuchndnezaris  adv.  Hierosol.  erpeditiom,  BonnK,  1856),  and  others 
have  justly  declared  themselves. 

(2.)  The  view  of  Kraniclifeld,  who  does  not  date  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  three  or  four 
years  after  Nebuchadnezzar's  victory  near  Carcheraish,  but  still  one  year  later,  or  "  not  earlier 
than  the  ninth  month  of  the  fifth  year  of  Jehoiakim,"  because  that  author  believes  himself 
compelled  to  regard  the  fast  mentioned  in  Jer.  xxxvi.  9.  as  having  preceded  the  fall  of  the 
city  ;  a  hypothesis  which  is  opposed  by  the  fact  that  it  fixes  the  transportation  of  Daniel  and 
other  Jewish  youths  to  Bal>ylon,  and  the  beginning  of  their  three  years"  course  of  instruction 
in  the  wisdom  of  the  Chalda?aus.  l)efore  the  capture  of  Jerusalem — thus  involving  an  inherent 
improbability,  and  conflicting  directly  with  Dan.  i.  2  et  seq.  (cf.  the  exegetical  remarks  on 
that  place). 

(3.)  The  assumption  of  Kleinert  (in  the  Dorpnter  theolog.  Beitragen.  II.  128  et  seq.)  ;  Hoff- 
mann (Die  70  Jiihre  des  Jeremia  nnd  die  70  Jahrwochen  Daniels,  Nuremberg,  1836,  p.  16  et  seq.  ; 
Weixsniivmi  und  ErfiiUung,  I.  297  et  seq.),  Hiivernick  {Neuelrit.  Unterss.,  p.  62  et  seq.),  Oehler 
(in  Tlioluck's  Literal:  Anzeiger,  1849,  p.  395  et  seq.),  and  Ziindel  (p.  20  et  seq.),  that  Jerusalem 
v.as  taken  1iy  Nebuchadnezzar  a  year  before  the  battle  of  Carchemish.  What  Keil  hag 
remarked  {Eiiil.,  §  133,  p.  440)  will  suffice  to  refute  this  view:  "This  combiuaticm  is  unten- 
able, because  it  cannot  be  reconciled  with  Jer.  xxv.  In  that  passage  the  fourth  year  of 
Jehoiakim  is  mentioned,  beyond  the  possibility  of  being  mistaken,  as  marking  an  epoch  for 
the  theocracy  and  for  all  the  nations  of  Western  Asia,  in  which  the  Lord  would  bring 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  all  the  triljcs  of  the  north  against  Jerasalem,  that  the  land  of  Judfea 
might  become  a  wilderness  and  its  inhabitants,  together  with  all  neighboring  nations,  be  sub- 
jected to  Babylon  during  seventy  years  (chap.  xxv.  9-11).  So  emphatic  a  prophecy  in  the 
mouth  of  .Jeremiah  would  be  utterly  incomi)rehensible,  if  .lerusalem  had  l)een  taken  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  Jehoiakim  Ijeen  made  tributary  a  year  previously,  while  in  the  fourth 
year  of  .Jehoiakim.  which  the  prophet  so  strongly  emphasizes  (xxv.  3  et  seq.),  nothing  of 
moment  had  trauspiied,  and  even  later  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim  nothing  had  occurred 
beyond  his  revolt  from  the  Chaldteaus  some  years  afterward,  by  which  he  became  involved  in 
hostilities  with  Imnds  of  Chaldieans,  Syrians,  Moabites,  and  Ammonites  (2  Kings  xxiv.  2). 
But  this  view  becomes  wholly  untenal)le  from  the  consider.ation  that,  at  a  time  when  the 
Egyptian  king,  who  had  advanced  towards  Carchemish  at  the  l)eginning  of  Jehoiakim's 
reign,  was  douljtless  in  possession  of  that  fortress,  Nebuchadnezzar  could  not  jjossibly  pass  by 
this  ho.stile  force  and  proceed  to  Jud;Ba,  while  exposing  Babylonia  to  so  powerful  a  foe.  But 
had  this  been  possible,  and,  incredible  as  it  is,  had  it  actually  occurred,  it  is  certain  that 
Pharauh-Necho  would  not  have  permitted  him  quietly  to  operate  in  tlie  rear  of  his  array  and 
overcome  Jehoiakim  his  vassal ;  nor  would  Neliucliadnezzar,  after  conquering  .Jerusalem,  have 
returned  to  capture  Carchemish  and  defeat  his  principal  enemy,  instead  of  proceeding  to 
Egy]3t,  and  making  an  easy  conquest  of  the  country,  which  was  deprived  of  its  defenders. 
But  aside  from  this,  the  method  under  consideration  is  irreconcilaljle  with  the  extracts  from 
Bjrosus  furnislied  by  Josephus  (Aid.  X.  11,  1  ;  contra  Ap.,  I.  19)."  Views  exactly  similar  are 
expressed  Ity  Hitzig,  p   3,  and  Kraniclifeld,  p.  17  et  seq. 

Note  3. — Is  the  Belshazzar  of  chap.  v.  the  same  as  Evil-merodach,  the  son  and  immediate 
successor  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  or  is  he  identical  with  Na!>onidus,  the  last  Baliylonian  king 
prior  to  the  Persian  invasion  i  The  latter  alternative,  which  is  advocated  Ijy  Jerome  (  Cumm. 
in  Dan.,  V.  1)  and  more  recently  by  Hengstenljerg,  Haverniek  (in  his  Commentary),  Aul)erlen, 
Keil,  and  in  substance  also  by  Pusey  (with  the  distinction,  however,  that  he  considers 
Belshazzar  as  the  son  and  co-regent  of  Nabonidus),  is  sui)|)orted  (1)  by  the  fact  that  accord- 
ing to  Herodotus,  I.  191,  and  Xenophon,  Cyrop.,  VII.  5,  15  et  seq.,  Babylon  was  taken  by  the 
Persiaus  while  a  luxurious  Ijanquec  was  in  progress,  and  (2)  l)y  the  circumstance  that  Herodo- 
tu.s,  I.  188,  calls  Labynetus  (=Nabonidus)  a  sou  of  NeJiuchadnezzar.  with  which  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  queen-mother  in  chap.  v.  10  (i)ossibly  the  Nitocris  of  Herodotus,  or  the  Amuheer 
of  Alexander  Polyhistor),  and  the  express  mention  of  Nel)uchadnezzar  as  the  fatlier  of  Bel- 
shazzar in  chap.  v.  11,  would  seem  to  corrtsjiond.  But  the  following  considerations  militate 
against  this  view,  and  favor  the  alternative  which  identifies  Belshazzar  with  Evil-merodach  : 
(1)  Both  the  Babylonian  historians,  Berosus  (in  Josephu.s,  Ant.,  X.  11,  1,  and  contra  Apion., 
I.  20)  and  Al)ydenus  (in  Euscb.,  Piivpar.  Ei:.  IX.  41,  and  Chron.  Arm.,  p.  28,  ed.  Mai)  agree, 
in  contrast  with  Herodotus,  in  representing  Nabonidus,  the  last  Babylonian  king,  as  a  usurper 
and  throne-robber  of  non-royal  descent,  wlio  conspired  with  a  numl)er  of  others  to  deprive 
Lal>orasoarchad,  the  youthful  grandson  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  of  his  tlirone  and  life,  and  who 
afterward  fell  into  the  hands  of  tli :  Persians,  not  at  the  taking  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus  during  a 
royal  lianquet,  but  some  time  after  the  capture  of  his  capital.  Tliey  relate  tliat,  having  been 
defeated  in  the  open  field,  he  threw  himself  into  the  fortress  of  Borsippa,  where  he  capitulated 
to  Cyius  after  the  fall  of  Babylon,  by  whom  he  was  exiled  to  Carmauia  (or,  as  Abydenud 
3 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


states,  he  was  made  governor  of  that  province).  That  these  traditions  of  Berosus  and  Aby- 
denus  by  no  means  owe  their  origin  to  a  boastful  tendency,  representing  the  Chaldfean  national 
interests  in  a  one-sided  manner,  but  as  certainly  comjjrehend  a  part  of  the  truth,  as  do  tha 
accounts  of  Herodotus  and  Xenophon,  has  been  shown  by  Kranichfeld,  as  cited  above,  in  the 
clearest  and  profoundest  manner.*  The  identity  of  Daniel's  Belshazzar  with  Evil-merodach 
is  confirmed  (2)  by  the  repeated  mention  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  his  father  (;««,  chap.  v.  11,  13, 
18,  22),  which  could,  in  every  case,  be  applied  to  a  more  distant  relationship,  e.  ff.,  grandfather 
and  grandson,  only  by  a  forced  interpretation ;  f  and  further  (3)  by  the  circumstance  that, 
according  to  Berosus  (Josephus,  as  above),  Evil-merodach  also  died  a  violent  death,  having 
been  murdered  Ijy  his  brother-in-law  Neriglissar  (cf.  Dan.  v.  30).  No  arguments  against  this 
identification  can  be  drawn  (a)  from  the  relation  of  Dan.  v.  30  to  vi  1 — since  these  passages 
are  not  necessarily  connected  (see  exeget.  remarks) ;  nor  (?/)  from  Dan.  viii.  1 ,  where  a  "  third 
year  of  Belshazzar  is  mentioned,  while  Berosus  and  the  Ptolemaic  canon  limit  the  reign  of 
Evil-merodach  to  two  years — since  these  latter  authorities  may  have  slightly  postdated  the 
years  of  that  reign,  i.e.,  may  have  included  the  first  year,  as  being  incomplete,  in  the  reign  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  ;  and  in  fact  the  canon  of  Syncellus  appears  to  assign  three  years  to  the  reign 
of  Evil-merodach  ;  nor  (c)  from  the  prophetic  descri])tions  in  Isa.  xxi.  5,  and  Jer.  li.  39,  which 
predict  that  Babylon  should  fall  in  its  dissipation,  but  by  no  means  assert  that  it  should  meet 
this  fate  while  a  bancjuet  or  carousal  was  in  progress ;  nor  finally  (d)  from  Jer.  lii.  31,  and  2 
Kings  XXV.  27,  where  the  immediate  successor  of  Nebuchadnezzar  is  called  Evil-merodsch,  as  in 
profane  authorities  ; — for  the  anomalous  name  in  Dan.  v.  may  be  readily  explained  on  the  ground 
of  the  very  general  custom  of  Oriental  sovereigns  to  bear  several  names  (cf  M.  v.  Niebuhr 
Gesc/(.  A.^iiiirs  villi  BaheJs.  p.  20  et  seq.,  where  reference  is  made  to  Sargon  =  Shalmaneser,  | 
Asshurdanipal=Kineladan,  and  many  others),  and  nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  Evil- 
merodach  bore,  in  addition  to  his  projjer  name,  a  title  containing  the  name  of  the  god  Bel, 
which  title  was  similar  to  the  appellative  that  Daniel  himself,  according  to  chap.  i.  5,  was 
compelled  to  assume.  And  it  is  jirobable  that  the  prophet  designedly  avoided  the  real  name 
of  the  king,  when  writing  of  Evil-merodach.  on  account  of  that  homonymy  (see  on  chap.  v.  1 
and  12).  Beyond  this,  tlie  fact  that  the  name  Belshazzar  occurs  as  belonging  to  Chaldfean 
kings  is  substantially  established  l)y  the  notice  deciphered  on  the  cylinders  of  Mugheir  by 
Oppert  and  Rawlinson,  which  refers  to  a  "  Belsarussur,  son  of  Nabomit  or  Nabumtuk"  (see 
Zeitschrift  der  deutsch  morgenl.  OeseUsch.,  viii.  598;  Athenmim,  1854,  p.  341);  although  the 
identity  of  this  Belsarussur  with  the  Belshazzar  of  Daniel,  which  is  asserted  by  Rawlinson  and 
Pusey  '{Daniel  the  PnqihH,  p.  403),  appears  to  be  highly  improbable,  since  this  son  of  Naboni- 
dus  cannot  1)e  shown  to  have  been  either  of  royal  rank  nor  descended  from  Nebuchadnezzar. 
Tliis  method,  which  identifies  Belshazzar  with  Evil-merodach,  is  supported  by  Marsham 
{Canon  e/inin.,  p.  596  et  seq.),  Hofmann  (Die  70  Jnhre  des  Jeremia,  etc.,  p.  44  et  seq.),  Hiiver- 
mck  (Neue  h-it.  Unterss. ,' p.  71  et  seq.),  Oehler  (in  Tholuck's  Anzeiger,  as  above,  p.  398), 
Hupfeld  {E.Tereitiit.  Eerodot.,  spec.  II..  Rintel,  1843,  p.  46),  Schulze  (Cyrvs  der  Grosse,  in  the 
Stiul.  u.  lirit.,  1853.  No.  3),  51.  v.  Niebuhr  {Geschkhte  As.w.rs  vnd  Bcdiels,  Berlin,  1857), 
Rockerath  (B/W.  Clmviologie,  MvnsteT.  1865,  p.  123).  Ziiudel  (Krit.  fTrato'ss.,  p.  29  et  seq.), 
Kraniclifeld  (p.  24  et  seq.).  Fuller  (Der  Pro/diet  Daniel,  p.  12),  A.  Scheuchzer  {Assyrische 
Fumehiini/en,  in  Heidenheim's  Vierteljnhrsscfiri/t,  etc..  Vol.  TV.,  No.  1),  Kliefoth  (j>.  146  et 
seq.),  and  others.  § 

*"  -  « 

•  Sec  espocially  p.  35  et  seq.  :  "  The  remarkable  incident  of  the  mysterious  writing  (chap.  y.  B  et  seq.1,  wliich  raised 
Diiniel  to  he  the  third  ruler  over  the  kingdom,  and  which  of  itself  wouid  have  aroused  attention  and  excited  remark,  the 
interpretation  which  con)iected  two  events  as  contemporary,  and  the  fact  that  some  of  the  events  foretold  in  the  mysterious 
nriting  actually  came  to  pa«B  the  same  night— all  these  taken  together  might,  in  the  course  of  time,  give  rise,  even  among 
the  natives,  to  the  legend  that  the  remaining  facts  contained  in  the  writing  and  its  interpretiition  transpired  in  that  night  a3 
well :  and  this  might  occur  still  more  easily  among  foreigners,  in  view  of  the  clouded  form  which  the  tradition  would  naturally 
assume  among  them,  as.  e.g..  in  the  case  of  the  Persians.  Whether  the  recollection  of  the  writing  and  interpretation  were 
presented  or  not  v/oiild  probably  not  modify  the  legend.  In  this  way  the  Persian  and  Median  tradition  might  easily  con- 
ceive of  the  natural  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  was  murdered  in  that  night,  as  being  also  the  last  Chaldsean  king,  and 
could  therefore  designate  him  by  the  name  AaPiinjTO?,  which  is  found  to  correspond  with  the  name  of  the  last  king  in  Berosus 
_Na/3<)i'w|Sos.  In  addition  to  the  name  which  Herodotus  gives  to  the  king  in  question  in  agreement  with  Berosus,  stich  a 
confusion  of  two  distinct  facts  by  the  tradition  is  confirmed  l>y  the  circumstance  that  these  authors.  In  contrast  with  Xeno- 
phon, speak  of  a  battle  which  preceded  the  taking  of  Babylon,  and  further,  that  Herodotus  does  not  allude  to  the  presence 
of  Xabonidus,  nor  to  his  death,  on  the  occasion  of  the  fall  of  the  city— thus  agreeing  with  Berosus,  who  relates  that  that  king 
had  retreated  towards  Borsippa.  Thus  the  facts  in  relation  to  the  fall  of  the  Chaldajan  dynasty,  as  they  are  preserved  in 
Berosus.  were  thrown  together  and  commingled  with  the  statements  of  Daniel,  concerning  the  wonderful  writing  (in  which 
the  cud  of  the  king  and  of  his  empire  were  co-ordinated) ;  and  this  cloudy  tradition  is  before  us  in  the  accounts  of  Herodo- 
tus and  Xenophon,  while  the  correct  account,  as  it  is  given  in  Dan.  v.,  forms  the  transition  from  the  sketch  in  Beror.l^ 
t.i  the  form  which  It  assumed  in  Herodotus  and  Xenophon." 

t  [Yet  this  usage  of  ;s  for /t^re/iillier  is  a  very  common  one.  as  any  Hebrew  Lexicon  will  show,] 

t  [The  cuneiform  inscriptions  show  that  Sargon  was  Shalmaneser's  son  an.l  successor.] 

i  [It  is  beset,  however,  \vith  many  insuperable  difficulties,  the  chief  of  which  are  cited  and  but  Impertectlj  met  In  the 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  35 

Together  with  the  hypothesis  of  Pusey,  already  referred  to,  we  are  compelled  to  reject  that 
indicated  by  Hofmann  {Die  70  Jahre,  etc.,  p.  44;  and  adopted  by  Delitzsch  (p.  278;  and  by 
Ebrard  (Die  Offenh.  Joh.,  p.  53),  which  identifies  Belshazzar  with  Laborasoarchad,  the  nephew 
of  Evil-raerodach  and  son  of  Neriglissar  (and  by  descent  from  him,  or  rather  from  his  consort, 
the  grandson  of  Nebuchadnezzar).  This  tow  Itecomes  untenable,  because  it  is  opposed  by  the 
expression,  "Nebuchadnezzar,  thy  father"  (1]^:s),  in  chap.  v.  11,  by  the  brief  reign  of  the 
child  Laborasoarchad,  extending,  according  to  Berosus,  only  over  nine  months  (cf.  with  this 
Dan.  viii.  1),  and  finally,  by  the  impossibility  of  substituting  Nebo-Shadrach  for  Laborasoar- 
chad, and  Bel-Shadrach  for  that;  for,  according  to  Isa.  xlvi.  1,  Bel  and  Nebo  are  not  the 
same,  but  different  divinities. 

Note  4.^The  identity  of  Darius  the  Mede  (chap.  vi.  1)  with  the  Cyaxares  of  Xenoplion,  the 
son  of  Astyages  and  father-in-law  of  Cyrus,  as  well  as  his  co-regent  for  a  time,  may  be  still 
more  positively  established  than  that  of  Belshazzar  (chap.  v.  1)  with  Evil-merodacli.  Even 
the  cj-itical  opponents  of  this  book  generally  acknowledge  the  reign  of  such  a  Cyaxares,  aa 
intervening  between  the  Median  Astyages  and  the  Persian  Cyrus,  and  thereby  recognize  the 
truth  of  Xenophon's  account,  despite  its  being  found  in  the  CyrQp(Bdia — a  work  which  so 
largely  bears  the  character  of  a  romance  (Bertholdt,  Gesenius,  Von  Lengerke,  and  even  Hitzig ; 
also  Holtzmann,  in  tlie  Deutsch-niorgenl.  Zeitschr.,  VIII.  3,  547,  etc.).  Tlie  existence  of  thia 
second  Cyaxares,  as  the  immediate  predecessor  of  Cyrus,  is  attested,  not  merely  by  numeroua 
statements  in  the  Cyropmlia  (I.  4,  7 ;  5,  2,  5 ;  III.  3,  20;  VIIL  5,  19;  7,  1),  but  also  by 
.dischylus  in  his  Ilfpixai,  v.  762-63  :    MgSot  yap  ijv  6  npiiTos  ^yfnoiK  iTTparoii  (Astyages),  '.\X\o£ 

6'eVctyou  Tral?  (Cyaxares)  ToS' f^yoi/ ^t/u(re TpiTos  S'dn  avTov  Kvpos^  ev8mpti)ViivT}pj  etc.,  unti 

by  Abydenus,  in  Euseb.,  Prwp.  Evang.,  IX.  14,  where  the  prophecy  of  Nebuchadnezzar  concern- 
ing the  fall  of  Babylon  as  quoted  above  (Note  1),  declares  with  reference  to  Cyrus,  tliat  "  the 
Mede,  the  pride  of  the  Assyrians,  should  be  his  helper  "  (m  Sq  (rwoiTios  earai  MqSijs,  to  'A(T(Tvpiiav 
aijxrjpa),  and  in  addition,  by  Josephus  {Ant.,  X.  11,4),  wlio  states  that  the  Greeks  gave  "  another 
name  "  to  the  son  of  Astyages — the  Darius  of  Daniel — which  was  doubtless  Kun|dpi;t,  as  trans- 
mitted by  Xenophon.  Nor  can  the  circumstance  that  Herodotus  does  not  mention  this  Cyaxares, 
and  makes  Cyrus  the  immediate  successor  of  his  grandfather  Astyages,  reflect  doul^t  on  the  exist- 
ence of  this  intervening  king,  since  the  remark  of  Gesenius  {Thesaur.,  p.  330)  holds  good  of 
Herodotus  as  a  writer  of  the  earlier  Assyrio-Babyloniau  and  Medo-Persian  history:  '^ Solere 
Herodotum  j)rmtennissis  mediocribus  hominibus  ex  longa  rerum  sorie  nonnisi  unum  alterumve 
inemorare  reliquis  emirientiorem,  ut  aliuwie  constat  et  ipsa  Babyloniai  historia  docet,  ex  qua 
Uhius  Nitocris  reginm  mentionem  injicit,  reliquos  rcges  usque  ad  Labynetum,  ne  Nehuchadnezare 
quidem  excepto,  silentio  transit."  The  only  real  ditSculty  connected  with  the  identification  of 
the  Median  king  in  chap.  vi.  and  the  Cyaxares  of  the  Cyropmlia  consists  in  the  name  Darius 
(^^'^"1'^)  given  to  the  former.     It  is  to  be  oljscrved,  however,  in  relation  to  this  circumstance : 

(1.)  In  general,  the  hearing  of  two  names  is  no  more  remarkable  among  the  Ancient  Median 
and  Persian  kings,  than  among  the  Assyrio-Babylonian ;  for  the  two-fold  language  and  litera- 
ture which  all  these  nations  employed  promoted  the  use  of  various  names  to  designate  one 
and  the  same  person,  as  did  also  the  custom  of  coimecting  honorable  appellatives  with  the 
proper  names  of  kings  and  other  eminent  persons ;  cf .  note  3. 

(2.)  The  names  Ol"nT  =  old  Persic  Ddrjawus,  and  Kva^dpr]s  =  the  Pers.  or  Med.  Unakshi- 
Uira.  appear  to  be  related  in  one  sense,  inasmuch  as  the  former  seems  to  be  synonymous  with 
'•  liolder,  or  governor"  {ep^eiris,  sceptrum  tenens),  and  the  latter  with  "direct,"  or  "actual 
ruler,"  and  the  one  to  be  of  Persian  origin,  tlie  other  of  Median  (Delitzsch,  p.  278). 

(3.)  Both  names,  and  especially  the  latter,  appear  to  have  been  stereotyped  royal  honorary 
titles,  and,  accordingly,  to  have  been  conferred  on  various  persons  ;  for 

(a.)  Cyaxares  I.,  the  father  of  Astyages  and  ally  of  Nabopolassar  and  conqueror  of  Nineveh 
(639-604),  bore  this  name. 

(b.)  Consequently  it  must  have  descended  to  Astyages  himself ;  for,  according  to  Dan.  ix 

1,  the  father  of  Darius  the  Mede  was  named  Ahasuerus,  the  Hebrew  fomi  of  which,  Ei"n™n»' 

"I  — ;» 
is  analogous  in  sound  with  the  Persian  Uvaksfuttara,  and  also  with  the  Greek  Kva^iipris.  But 
further 

{c.)  Cyrus  himself  appears  occasionally  to  have  borne  the  name  of  Cyaxares  or  Uvakshatara 
as  an  lionorary  title;  for,  according  to  Holtzmann  {Deutsch-morgenl.  Zeitschrift,  as  above),  an 
old  Persian  cuneiform  inscription  contains  tlie  names  Cyrus  {Qurus)  and  Uvakshatara  in 
immediate  consecution  :  "  Ego  Cyrus  CyriMii'es,"  wliich  may  l)e  synonymous  with  "  Ego  Cyrus 
imperator^'  (cf.  Niebuhr,  Gesch.  Ass.  und  Bib.,  p.  214,  note  4),  but  can  scarcely  be  rendered 
by  ''Ego  Cyrus  Cyaxeres,  se.jUius,"  as  Holtzmann  suggests.     Finally, 

(d. )  The  name  Cyaxares  corresponds  also  to  Xerxes,  as  is  indicated  by  the  Pers.  form 
Kslijdrcha  or  KshjArsha,  an  abbreviation  or  contraction  of  Uvakshatara  ;  also  by  the  Hebrew 

foregoing  discussion.    The  hypotliesis  has  far  le^  to  recommend  it  than  the  identltication  of  Belshazzar  with  Naboaadllu*f 
»CD — Bfilsaruzur  of  the  Ascriptions.     See  foot-note  at  the  end  of  No.  i  above.] 


56  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

Ci'^'irnK ;  aud  since  a  Persian  king  is  designated,  in  Ezra  iv.  6,  by  the  latter  name,  who  can 
hardly  be  any  other  than  Cambyses,  in  view  of  the  chronology ;  and  further,  since  the  Ahasu- 
erus  of  tlie  book  of  Esther  is  the  same  as  Artaxerxes  I.  Longimanus  (instead  of  Xerxes,  ag 
most  moderns  since  Scaliger  hold),  according  to  the  opinion  which  prevails  in  the  Stptuagint, 
Josephus.  and  the  ancients  generally,  and  wliich  lias  not  l)een  refuted,*  we  may  regard  the 
name  Cyaxares-Xerxes  as  being  in  fact  a  standing  title,  which  descended  from  the  last  Median 
kings  to  all  the  Achaemenians.  Similarly,  the  early  Median  kings  seem  generally  to  have 
borne  the  name  Ajis-Dahaha  or  Ashdah/ik  (i.e.,  di-agon)  since  both  Deioces,  who  founded 
Ecliatana  about  700  (Herod.  I.  102),  and  Cyaxares  I.,  who,  according  to  Bero.sus  and  Abydenus, 
w-as  also  called  Astyages  {i.e..  Ashdahak),  and  also  Astyages,  the  father  of  Cyaxares  XL,  were 
designated  Ijy  this  title.  The  descent  of  names  to  others  also  finds  its  parallel  among  the 
rulers  of  other  ancient  Oriental  kingdoms,  e.g..  of  Armenia,  Cappadocia,  Pontus,  and  even 
among  the  Egyptians  after  Ptolemy  (cf.  Niebuhr,  as  above,  pp.  32,  44,  etc.).  It  might  possi- 
bly l)e  shown  that  the  name  Darius  (Darjawus)  belongs  to  this  class  of  standing  royal  titles 
among  tlie  Persians,  from  the  designation  of  the  golden  coins  of  that  kingdom  as  Darics. 
This  designation  dates  back,  indeed,  to  Darius  Hystaspis,  according  to  Herodotus,  IV.  166,  but 
according  to  Suidas,  Harpocration,  and  the  scholiast  on  Aristophanes'  Ecdesiaz.,  it  traces  its 
origin  "  to  an  older  king  of  that  name  " — who,  however,  is  not  necessarily  the  same  as  Daniel's 
Darius-Cyaxares  (as  also  the  reference  in  the  Chron.  Armen.  of  Eusebius,  p.  58:  "Darius  rex 
d-e  regionc  dfpiilit  aliquantulum,^'  need  not  be  applied  to  the  Darius  of  this  book).  But  in  any 
case,  it  is  clear  from  what  has  been  stated,  that  the  difference  between  the  names  Cyaxares  and 
Darius  does  not  compel  us  to  assume  a  difference  between  the  persons  who  are  thus  designated 
by  Xenophon  and  Daniel,  and  that  all  other  views  become  superfluous  in  proportion  as  the 
identity  of  the  two  becomes  j)robable.  Of  such  we  mention  that  of  M.  v.  Niebuhr  (pp.  91, 
223),  which  identifies  Darius,  Dan  vi.  1  et  seq.,  with  the  last  Median  king  Astyages,  who  is 
said  to  have  subjugated  Babylon  after  the  death  of  Belshazzar  or  Evil-merodach,  and  to  have 
been  deprived  of  his  Median  kingdom  in  the  follomng  year  by  Cyrus,  so  that  Babylon  again 
Ijecame  independent ;  that  of  Kleinert  (in  the  Dm'}).  Beitriige),  which  assumes  that  Darius  the 
Mede  was  a  natural  son  of  Cyaxares  I.,  and  younger  brother  to  Astyages,  while  Cyaxares  II. 
was  his  nephew  and  shared  in  his  government ;  and  that  of  Schiilze  {Cyrus  der  Ch-osse,  in  the 
Stud.  u.  IlI-U.,  as  above,  p.  68.5),  which  is  also  favored  by  Zundel  (p.  36  et  seq.),  by  which 
Cyaxares  IL,  who  is  held  to  be  identical  with  Darius  the  Mede,  was  not  the  sou,  but  a  younger 
brother  of  Astyages,  and  therefore  a  son  of  Cyaxares  I.  (Ahasuerus,  Dan.  ix.  1),  whom  Xeno- 
phon erroneously  transformed  from  a  Cyaxarides  into  an  Astyagides,  by  which  error  the  great- 
uncle  of  Cyrus  was  converted  into  his  uncle.  The  correct  view  is  advocated  Ijy  Josephus 
(supra),  .Jerome  on  Dan.  vi.  1,  and  among  modems,  Offerhaus  {Spicilegia  histor.-chrunolog.,  lib. 
ni.,  Gron.,  1739,  p.  20.5  ss.),  Jehring  (Bihliotheka  Bremensis,  VIII.  580  ss.),  Gesenius  ( jf'tea'.;?'., 
L  349  et  seq.).  Winer  {Reaho.,  I.  250),  Hengstenberg  (p.  48  et  seq.),  Havemick  {Comm.,  p.  203 
et  seq.  ;  Nene  Irit.  Untersa.,  j).  74  et  seq.),  Keil  (p.  457),  Delitzsch  (p.  278),  Krauichfeld  (p.  39 
ct  seq.),  Auberlen  (pp.  16,  212),  Fliller  (p.  141),  and  Kliefoth  (p.  160  et  seq.).t  In  relation  to 
the  passage,  chap.  vi.  2  (tlie  120  satraps  of  Darius),  which  apparently  conflicts  with  the  view 
advocated  above,  see  the  exegetical  remarks  on  that  place,  where  also  the  effort  of  Ebrard 
[Die  Offeiih.  Johannes  erHart,  p.  55  et  seq.),  and  several  others,  to  identify  Darius  with  the 
N"abonidus  of  Berosus  will  be  sufficiently  considered. 

§  9.  Authenticity  op  the  Book  (Concluded). 

e.  Examination    of  the    inteun-^l   reasons    against   its   genuirteiuss,   which   are    hased,  on  its 

sim.^CLES  and  prophecies. 

The  narration  of  miracles  and  prophecies  by  Daniel  is  no  more  irreconcilable  with  the  view 
that  the  book  originated  with  him  than  are  the  historico-chronological  difficulties  which  are 
asserted  to  be  insuperable ;  for 

(1.)  The  miracles  recorded  in  the  first  part,  and  particularly  the  preservation  of  the  three 
men  in  the  flames  of  the  fiery  furnace  (chap,  iii.),  the  appearance  of  the  mysterious  hand  upon 
the  wall  (chap.  v.  5),  and  the  deliverance  of  Daniel  from  the  den  of  lions  (chap,  vi.),  present 
no  features  whatever  whicli  fundamentally  distinguish  them  from  other  miracles  of  the  Old- 
Testament  stage  of  revelation,  or  which  mark  them  as  the  invention  of  a  lati;r  period.     On 

•  [But  this  identification  of  the  Ahasuerus  of  EHther  with  Arta-ter-xes  Longimanus  instead  of  Xerxea  is  beset  with  so 
many  <lifficulties  that  it  is  now  almost  universally  rejected.] 

t  [On  the  ^ound  of  the  superior  authority,  however,  of  the  other  Greek  hisforians  over  the  single  testimony  of  the 
romance  of  Xenophon.  this  identiticatiun  of  "  Darius  the  Mede"  with  Cyaxares  II.,  or  even  the  existence  of  the  latter,  i* 
still  strongly  coutested  by  many  writers  on  classical  history,  who  do  not  seem  to  allow  the  passage  in  Daniel  sufficient 
weight  in  the  discussion.] 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  31 

the  contrary,  the  principal  periods  of  Old- Testament  development  in  its  eariier  stages,  and 
especially  the  Mosaic  period  and  that  of  Elijah  and  Elisha,  that  is  to  say,  the  primitive  stages 
of  the  legal  and  prophetic  periods,  abound  with  incidents  of  a  still  more  extraordinary  cliar- 
ftcter,  e.g.,  the  passages  through  the  Red  Sea  and  the  Jordan;  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  of 
fire;  the  writing  of  the  law  on  tables  by  the  liand  of  God  (Ex.  xxxi.  18  ;  xxxii.  10) ;  the  con- 
suming of  Nadab  and  Abihu  by  fire  from  the  Lord  (Lev.  x.  1)  ;  the  feeding  of  Elijah  at  the 
brook  Cherith  by  ravens  (1  Kings  xvii.  4);  the  destruction  of  Ahaziali's  captain  and  his  fifty 
in  the  presence  of  Elijah  (2  Kings  i.  10  et  seq.);  EUsha's  raising  of  the  dead  and  providing 
of  food ;  the  floating  iron  in  the  Jordan,  etc.  If  the  Divine  economy  of  revelation  required 
such  miracles  for  the  founding  of  tlie  theocracy,  for  the  attestation  of  its  principal  I)earers 
and  supportere,  and  for  the  inauguration  of  the  prophetic  institution,  why  sliould  it  not 
require  them  at  this  juncture,  when  the  continuation  of  the  theocracy  was  endangered  by  an 
oppressive  heathendom,  wliich  was  to  be  feared  tlie  more,  because  of  its  sensual,  luxurious, 
and  syncretistic  character,  and  when  a  large  portion  of  the  people  had  yielded  to  these  evil 
influences  to  an  extent  that  threatened  the  utter  absorption  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah  by  the 
conglomerate  religions  of  Babylonia  and  MedoPersia  ?  The  critical  epoch  at  the  close  of  tlie 
captivity  required — with  an  urgency  almost  equal  to  tliat  which  existed  in  the  opening  period 
of  the  Old  Covenant — that  Jehovah  should  display  his  power  in  the  face  of  tlie  proud  world- 
kingdoms  and  tlieir  scornful  rulers,  who  laid  claim  to  Divine  honors  and  even  to  deification, 
and  that  He  sliould  thus  at  once  confirm  the  tottering  faith  of  His  followers  by  appearing  as 
the  same  faithful  and  living  God  of  the  covenant,  and  crush  the  insolent  daring  and  silly 
superstition  of  tliose  tyrants,  by  demonstrating  His  right  to  rank  as  the  King  of  all  kings,  and 
as  the  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth.  Wonders  of  a  similar  character,  although  not  so  striking 
and  extraordinary  as  those  in  Daniel,  had  been  wrought  by  the  principal  rei)resentative  of  the 
prophetic  otBce,  as  early  as  the  age  of  Isaiah  and  Hezekiah,  while  Shalmaneser  and  Sennach- 
erib were  bringing  like  oppression  and  temptations  to  bear  on  the  faithful  ones  among  the 
people  of  God  (e.g.,  the  retrogression  of  the  shadow  on  the  dial  of  Ahaz ;  the  healing  of 
Hezekiah,  etc.).  Toward  the  close  of  the  exile  such  Divine  self-attestations  were  repeated, 
but  in  increased  measure ;  and  the  agent  was  again  the  leading  prophet  of  the  time,  wlio  thus 
became  the  analogue  and  successor  of  Isaiah.  These  facts  will  be  the  less  surprising  when  we 
reflect  that  it  was  now  important  to  make  a  profound  impression,  not  only  on  the  mcmbeis  of 
the  theocracy,  but  likewise  on  their  oppressors,  the  heathen  rulers ;  an  impression  such  as  the 
miracles  of  Moses  were  designed  to  produce  on  Pharaoh,  and  such  as  actually  was  produced 
in  the  case  of  the  ChaldsEan  and  Medo-Persian  antitypes  of  Pharaoh — unless,  indeed,  the 
statements  relating  to  repeated  acts  of  homage  rendered  to  Daniel's  God  by  Nebuchadnez- 
zar and  Darius  (Dan.  ii.  46  et  seq.  ;  iii.  28  et  seq. ;  iv.  31  et  seq. ;  vi.  29  et  seq.),  and  also 
that  concerning  the  public  recognition  of  the  supreme  divinity  of  Israel's  God  l>y  Cyrus  in 
the  edict  of  liberation  (Ezra  i.  1-4),  which  is  supported  by  other  historical  authorities,  are  to 
be  remanded  to  the  realm  of  myths  and  fables — a  conclusion  which,  in  the  latter  instance, 
only  the  most  radical  hyper-criticism  could  reach.  This  comparison  with  the  Mosaic  period 
affords  the  only  valid  basis  on  which  to  form  a  proper  estimate  of  the  age  of  Daniel,  with  its 
peculiar  national  conditions  and  its  miracles,  since  the  sufferings  and  trials  of  that  period, 
which  assailed  the  faith  of  God's  children  and  threatened  the  further  existence  of  the  theo- 
cratic community,  were  met,  like  those  of  the  captivity,  on  foreign,  soil,  in  the  liouse  of  bond- 
age and  the  land  of  misery.  The  sufferings,  together  with  the  inducements  to  idolatry,  of  the 
time  of  the  Judges,  were  experienced  by  Israel  on  its  own  domestic  soil ;  the  afllictions  of  the 
period  subsequent  to  the  exile,  e.g.,  in  the  times  of  Ezra  and  of  the  Maccabees,  likewise  befell 
God's  people  while  dwelling  in  the  land  of  their  fathers,  and  for  that  very  reason  were  less 
dangerous  to  their  religious  and  national  life,  than  were  the  sufferings  during  either  of  those 
seasons  of  tribulation  and  persecution,  which  were  undergone  in  "  a  strange  land  "  (Psa. 
cxxxvii.  4).  It  is,  therefore,  decidedly  impertinent  and  unhistorical  to  allege,  as  do  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  genuineness  of  this  book,  that  it  owes  its  origin  solely  to  a  sujjposed  analogy 
between  the  periods  of  the  captivity  and  of  the  Asmonseans,  and  to  ascribe  to  this  invented 
Daniel  the  design  of  exhibiting  the  humiliations  experienced  by  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Darius 


38  EfTEODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DAJJIEL. 

Medus,  in  consequence  of  the  Divine  miracles  and  of  the  gracious  strength  and  unyielding 
firmness  of  the  theocratic  witnesses  to  the  truth,  as  a  warning  to  Antiochus  Epiphancs,  the 
imitator  of  the  religious  tyranny  of  those  monarchs.  A  certain  typical  analogy  between 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  Antiochus  may  readily  be  granted  ;  but  the  fundamental  difference,  or 
rather  contrast,  between  these  two  peiiods  of  persecution,  that  Israel  suffered  during  the  one 
while  in  captivity,  and  during  the  other  while  domiciled  on  its  native  soil,  is  none  the  less 
apj)arent.  The  inaljility  of  Israel  to  resist  the  oppressoi-s  with  armed  force,  and  also  the 
necessity  for  God  to  interfere  with  his  wonder-working  power,  resulted  inmiediately  from  the 
conditions  of  the  foiTuer  instance;  while  in  the  latter  case  the  nation  could  struggle  for  its 
country,  its  sanctuary,  and  its  faith,  and  therefore  required  no  other  miracles  than  those  of 
warlike  enterprise  and  of  devoted  courage  that  even  courted  martyrdom,  such  as  are  described 
in  the  Maccabosan  books  (see  note  1). 

(2.)  Nor  can  the  prophecies  contained  in  this  book  be  made  to  serve  as  witnesses  against  its 
geuuineness ;  for,  despite  their  visional  form  throughout  (which,  however,  they  bear  in  com- 
mon with  the  former  half  of  Zechariah,  with  numerous  portions  of  Ezekiel,  and  even  with 
extended  sections  of  older  prophetic  books,  e.g.,  Amos,  Isaiah,  etc.),  they  exhibit  the  general 
characteristic  features  of  Old-Testament  prophecy  everywhere,  since  they  relate  to  the  condi- 
tions and  requirements  of  the  time,  are  steadily  possessed  with  the  idea  of  the  triumjA  of 
God's  kingdom  in  its  conflict  with  the  world-powers,  and  develop  this  conflict  in  harmony 
with  its  growing  intensity  down  to  the  time  of  the  final  Messianic  triumph  and  judgment,  in 
descriptions  that  become  moi-e  and  more  minute  as  they  progress.  Tlie  book  dcscriljes  this 
Messianic  period  during  which  the  Deliverer  is  to  appear,  as  immediately  connected  with  the 
resurrection  of  the  just  and  the  unjust  to  their  final  judgment  (chap.  xii.  1-3) ;  and  it  assigns 
that  event  to  a  time  that  follows  closely  on  the  death  of  a  raging  Antichrist,  whose  descrip- 
tion seems  to  be  largely  met  in  many  traits  belonging  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (see  chap.  xi. 
21-45).  But  it  does  not  follow  from  this  that  its  author  was  a  contemporary  of  that  king, 
who  described  the  historical  events  from  the  captivity  to  his  time  in  the  style  of  prophecy ; 
since  tliis  feature  is  merely  another  illustration  of  the  general  law  of  prophetic  visional  per- 
spective. At  tlie  farthest,  certain  of  the  more  detailed  predictions  of  the  section  (chap.  x.  and 
xi.)  relating  to  the  develo))ment  of  the  world-powers  after  the  fall  of  the  Persian  kingdom, 
might,  as  has  already  been  observed  (§  1,  note  3,  and  §  9),  be  regarded  as  the  later  additions 
of  an  apocaljjjtist  living  in  the  time  of  Antiochus,  who  sought  to  give  a  more  definite  form 
to  tlie  propliecy  of  Daniel.  Aside  from  these  external  and  unessential  singularities,  there  is 
included  in  the  |)rophetic  contents  of  the  book  nothing  connected  with  the  development  of 
the  world-kingdoms  until  the  advent  of  the  Messiah,  that  might  not  have  been  foreseen  and 
predicted  l^y  a  Divinely-enlightened  seer  in  the  closing  period  of  the  captivity.  Although 
such  a  seer  had  witnessed  the  su2)planting  of  but  one  great  world-kingdom  by  another,  and 
although  the  extended  range  of  observation  which  he  enjoyed  might  leveal  in  the  more  dis- 
tant political  horizon  liut  a  single  additional  power  in  the  progress  of  develo]  mtnt ;  still 
nothing  is  easier  to  conceive  than  that,  by  the  enlightening  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  a 
long  succession  of  world-monarchies,  previous  to  Messiah's  kingdom,  should  open  to  his 
vision,  and  that  he  should  symbolically  represent  this  succession  of  jjowers  by  certain  figures 
taken  from  the  ]jroducts  of  Babylonian  and  Medo-Persian  culture  and  art,  as  in  the  visions  of 
chap,  vii.-x.  Nor  do  the  attempts  to  reach  a  more  exact  chronological  exposition  of  the 
development  represented  by  the  succession  of  these  kingdoms,  which  are  found  more  especially 
in  the  last  four  chapters  of  the  book,  involve  any  feature  that  does  not  suggest  a  parallel, 
on  the  oue  hand  in  the  earlier  prophets  (e.g.,  Isa.  vii.  8  ;  xxiii.  15  ;  Jer.  xxv.  11  et  seq.  ;  xxix. 
10),  and  on  the  other,  in  the  mathematical  studies  of  Babylonian  astronomers,  and  the 
attempted  application  of  these  to  (astrological)  calculations  of  the  future.  Tlie  inclefinite 
character  which  probably  attached  to  these  symbolico-chronological  descriptions  of  the  future 
in  their  oiiginal  form,  did  not  correspond  to  the  historical  succession  of  events  as  such,  and 
may  have  been  now  and  then  removed  by  the  hand  of  the  later  reviser  in  order  to  give  place 
to  features  harmonizing  more  exactly  with  the  facts.  But,  upon  the  whole,  even  these  chap- 
ters contain  far  more  prophecy  of  an  ideally  descriptive  character  than  of  detailed  historical 


AUTHENTICITr  OP  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  39 

prediction,  calculated  to  excite  the  suspicion  of  a  composition  subsequent  to  the  event;  aud 
the  book,  therefore,  bears  the  character  of  a  work  whose  origin  during  the  captivity,  and  whose 
inspired  i^rophetic  nature  are  decidedly  more  probable  than  itg  forged  and  simulated  compo- 
sition in  the  Maccabjean  age.  Especially  is  the  mention  by  Peter  of  an  anxious  looking  for 
the  period  in  which  the  Messiah  should  appear  (1  Pet.  i.  10-13),  as  a  characteristic  of  the 
inspired  prophets  of  the  Old  Covenant,  more  directly  applicable  to  this  work  than  to  any 
other  prophetical  book  in  the  canon  (see  notes  3  and  3). 

Note  1. — In  relation  to  the  miracles  of  the  time  of  Daniel,  as  demanded  by  the  oppressed 
condition  of  Israel  ("see  §  1,  note  1),  and  especially  the  remarks  of  Havemick  there  quoted, 
compare  further,  Havemick,  Neue  krit.  Unterss.,  p.  8.5:  "Without  such  a  revelation  of 
Jehovah,  the  theocracy  would  have  been  involved  in  heathendom,  or  absorbed  by  it.  Jeho- 
vah's signs  and  wonders  showed,  despite  the  presence  of  the  powerful  world-kingdoms,  that 
He  stillwas  the  King  of  kings,  and  through  them  the  question  of  the  continued  existence  of 
the  theocracy  was  really  decided."  See  ibid.,  p.  87,  for  the  fact  that  the  Asmona;au  period,  on 
the  contrary,  was  diaracterized  by  an  ahsence  of  miracles  :  "  In  the  Maccalisean  period  the  for- 
saking of  tiie  nation  by  God  was  manifested  precisely  in  a  manner  that  excluded  miracles. 
The  dead  form  remained  to  the  people  in  petrified  traditions  ;  Init  the  freshness  and  life  of 
the  old  theocratic  and  prophetic  spirit  was  wanting.  This  consciousness  (that  the  ancient, 
prophetism  with  its  miraculous  power  must  first  be  revived)  fiAds  expression  in  the  monuments 
of  that  time  with  sufHcient  clearness.  The  fii-st  Ijook  of  Maccabees  has  not  a  single  reference 
to  miracles  ;  the  disheartened  age  cannot  even  expect  them,"  etc.  See,  further,  Kranichfeld, 
who  observes,  in  correspondence  with  the  parallelism  above  establ'shed  between  tlie  miracles 
of  Daniel  and  those  of  Moses  and  Elijah,  "  Precisely  the  periods  oi  an  especially  hopeless  con- 
dition of  tlie  theocracy  are  found  to  present  suitable  conditions  for  the  intervention  of  the 
Scriptural  miracle,  designed,  as  it  is,  to  strengtlien  the  theocratic  consciousness."  The  asser- 
tion of  Hitzig,  that  a  susceptihiUty  of  the  human  mind  and  disposition  for  tlie  usual  influence 
of  especially  wonderful  events,  i.e.,  a  faith  in  them,  could  not  have  been  developed  during 
the  '  night  of  the  exile,"  is  without  either  historical  or  psychological  support.  If  tlierc  was 
ever  a  night  of  discouragement  for  Israel,  it  was  in  tht  circumstances  of  the  Egyptian  period, 
as  descril)ed  in  Exod.  vi.  9,  12  ;  yet  that  period  contained  the  germ  of  a  far-reaching  exalta- 
tion of  faitli  and  trust,  such  as  is  frequently  found  in  intimate  connection  witli  resignation  and 
a  gloomy  sense  of  both  outward  and  siiiritual  oppression.  The  137th  Psalm,  as  an  example 
of  the  actual  current  of  theocratic  thought,  may  serve  to  indicate,  that  during  the  "  niglit  of 
the  exile"  as  well,  complaints  and  tears  might  consist  with  an  iutenuii  profound  and  glowing 
excitation  which  longs  for  the  Divine  Deliverer.  It  has  already  been  renuirked  tliat  the 
descriptions  relating  to  the  circumstances  of  the  captivity,  in  the  second  part  of  Isaiah's  pro- 
phecies, represent  an  a])i)arently  hopeless  demoralization  of  the  religious  and  national  spirit  as 
coexistent  with  the  strengthening  and  elevation  of  the  theocratic  consciousness  by  means  of 
miracles.  The  extent  to  which  the  i)rophetic  office  of  Ezekiel — the  prophet  of  tlie  opening 
period  of  the  captivity — corresponds,  in  view  of  the  conditions  of  the  time,  and  of  his  per- 
sonal traits,  with  that  of  Daniel,  the  j)ropliet  of  the  closing  period,  and  also  the  significant 
contrast  lietween  them,  are  remarked  by  Havernick,  as  cited  above  :  "  While  the  duty  of  influ- 
encing the  captives  during  the  exile  through  the  ward  is  devolved  mainly  on  Ezekiel,  everything 
in  the  position  of  Daniel  unfolds  a  different  field  of  activity,  viz.  :  to  defend  the  rights  of  the 
people  of  dod  in  their  relations  to  the  lieatlien.  This  peculiar  duty  constituted  a  man  of 
action  (like  Moses,  Elijah,  etc.),  who  opposed  the  superior  Divine  wisdom  to  the  confused 
wisdom  of  men,  and  Ijrought  the  deeds  of  victorious  kings  into  contrast  with  tlie  more  pow- 
erful energy  of  God.  His  relation  to  Ezekiel  is  therefore  complementary,  and  thus  becomes 
a  truly  glorious  testimony  to  the  grace  of  God,"  etc.  Keil,  pp.  459,  4G1,  shows  the  injustica 
of  the  charge  occasionally  raised  against  the  author  {e.g.,  by  'V'on  Lengerke,  Dati..  p.  LXII.), 
that  he  is  guilty  of  a  "  useless  expenditure  "  or  "  needle.ss  accumulation  "  of  miracles.  As 
the  really  miraculous  is  confined  to  the  three  wondera  mentioned  in  chapters  iii.,  v.,  and  vi., 
there  can  be  no  reason  for  tlie  assertion  of  such  an  accumulation  of  wonders  or  rage  for  mira- 
cles on  the  part  of  the  author,  especially  wlien  compared  with  the  far  greater  numl^er  of  the 
miracles  of  Moses  or  Elisha.  But  it  has  already  been  observed  in  §  4,  note  3,  as  a  character- 
istic peculiarity  of  Daniel's  method  of  narration,  that  he  does  not  avoid  the  recognition  of  the 
Divine  power  and  grace,  as  displayed  in  miracles,  but  rather  avails  himself  of  every  oppor- 
tunity afforded  hy  his  experience  to  call  attention  to  the  baud  of  Providence,  and  to  place  fhe 
events  of  his  time  in  the  light  of  a  childlike  believing  and  theocr.actical  pragmatism.  It  must 
be  reserved  for  the  detailed  exposition  of  the  historical  part  to  illustrate  more  specifically  tliia 
peculiarity,  in  wliich  the  Ijooks  of  Esther  and  of  Chronicles  likewise  participate,  and  whicli 
we  would  characterize  as  tlie  throeratic  chronicling  style  of  the  captivity  and  the  succeeding 
period  (see  tlie  observations  on  chap.  iii.). 

Note  3. — In  opposition  to  the  assertion  of  Liicke,  that  the  apocalyptic  character  of  oui 


iQ  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

book  as  a  prophecy,  necessarily  involves  its  pseudonymy,  see  above,  §  1,  note  2.  It  is  impor- 
tan',,  in  view  of  the  assertion  by  Bleek  {EM.,  §  259),  that  •'  the  especially  definite  character 
of  the  predictions  extends  precisely  to  tlie  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  no  farther,"  to 
observe  the  many  obscure,  indefinite,  and  ambiguous  features  which  are  found  in  the  prophe- 
cies in  the  second  part  of  the  book,  and  which  indicate  with  eutficient  clearness  that  the 
position  of  the  writer  was  that  of  a  seer  who  looks  forward,  and  whose  descriptions  are  there- 
fore only  ideal,  instead  of  that  of  a  prophetic  historian  who  recalls  the  past.  Compare  Kran- 
ichf  eld,  p.  58 :  "  The  prophecies  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  in  their  descriptions,  are  never  inde- 
pendent of  the  course  of  history  as  such,  and  nowhere  bear  the  character  of  absolute, 
unconditioned,  and  therefore  miraculous  predictions.  They  do  not  contain  a  single  paragraph 
(?)  which,  when  viewed  entirely  ai)art  from  its  fulfilment,  might  not  be  considered  as  merely 
the  independent  development  of  a  theocratical  thought,  or  complexity  of  thoughts,  founded 
on  historical  facts.  For  this  reason  detailed  descriptions  of  the  course  of  future  events  are 
met  with  which  do  not  fully  correspond  to  the  actual  history  ;  and  this  is  as  readily  conceiv- 
able as  it  is  natural.  The  critics  have  no  difficulty  about  explaining  away  such  differ- 
ences, which  become  especially  prominent  on  a  comparison  of  the  description  of  the  last 
heathen  kingdom  and  its  final  conformation  in  the  rimes  of  the  Seleucidie  and  the  JIaccahees 
(chap.  X.  and  xi.) ;  and  the  product  of  such  arbitrary  interpretation  is  ranged  with  the  remain- 
ing occasional  correspondences  of  the  projihecy  with  the  course  of  history,  which  are  natural, 
because  they  have  their  basis  in  religious  and  ethical  truth.  The  resultant  caricature  of  Scrip- 
tural prophecy,  similar  to  that  presented  in  the  later  so-called  apocalyjjse  of  Judaism,  the 
Jewish  Siliyls,  the  book  of  Enoch,  the  •ith  book  of  Esdras,  thus,  in  the  end,  becomes  a  certain 
prize."  The  opinion  here  expressed  is  correct  in  all  its  essential  features,  and  will  bear  modi- 
fjring  only  in  the  single  statement  relating  to  the  alleged  unexce])tionally  ideal  character  of 
the  descriptions  of  the  future,  contained  in  chapters  x.  and  xi.  We  regard  it  as  exceedingly 
proljable  that  in  this  connection,  but  only  here,  occasional  vatirinia  ej;  eventu  were  interjjolated 
by  a  later  hand,  and  doubtless  Ijy  a  theocrat  of  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epijihanes ;  for  the 
congruity  between  the  prophecy  and  the  facts  by  which  it  is  fultUled,  is  frequently  more 
apparent  than  the  fundamental"  law  of  Old-Testiiment  prophecy  appears  to  warrant  (cf.  §  1, 
note  2).  None  of  the  special  predictions  which  are  usually  cited  as  being  analogous  to  Dan. 
X.,  xi. — whether  Isa.  vii.  8  (possil>ly  an  interpolated  passage),  Isa.  xiii.  1-14 ;  xxi.  1-10  ;  Jer. 
XXV.  11  et  seq.  ;  xxix.  10;  or  Ezek.  xxiv.  2.5-27,  etc. — do,  in  fact,  compare  with  Dan.  xi.  in 
point  of  remarkable  and  often  directly  particularizing  correspondence  between  prophecy 
and  fulfillment:  cf.  Auberlen,  p.  71  et  seq.  ;  Hengstenberg.  p.  173  et  seq.*  Tlie  decidedly 
eschatological  character  of  chap.  xii.  1  et  seq.,  may  be  insisted  on,  as  a  special  argument 
against  the  assertion  that  the  book  was  written  from  the  point  of  view  which  ijrevailcd  in  the 
Maccaboean  age,  and  that,  more  particularly,  its  final  chapters  were  composed  •■  immediately 
after  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  became  known "  (Bleek).  That  passage  does  not 
merely  assign  the  beginning  of  the  future  Messianic  period  to  the  rime  immediately  following 
the  death  of  Antichi-ist  (xi.  45),  but  also  its  close,  and  may  therefore  have  originated  with  a 
prophet  belonging  to  an  earlier  age,  who  saw  the  anti-christian  tyrant  as  a  vision  of  the  dis- 
t.ant  future  (cf.  similar  perspective  descriptions  of  the  future,  following  upon  gloonVy  prophe- 
cies of  evil,  in  Amos  ix.  11  et  seq.;  Mc.  vii.  12  et  seq.;  Isa.  xi.  1  et  seq.,  etc.),  but  can 
hardly  have  emanated  from  a  designing  forger  of  the  troul)led  times  of  the  Asmonaeans.  To 
employ  this  passage  as  a  proof  of  the  origin  of  the  book  under  Epiphanes,  or  to  postpone  the 
composition  of  the  closing  chapters,  x.-xii.,  until  even  after  the  death  of  that  tyrant,  is  to 
manifest  a  gross  misapprehension  of  the  nature  of  Messianic  prophecy — its  complex  and 
apotelesmatic  character,  its  necessary  co-ordinating  of  the  near  and  distant  future  in  perspec- 
tive vision  (cf.  Delitzsch,  p.  286).  Compare  infra,  on  chap.  vii.  8;  ix.  24  et  seq.  ;  and  see 
the  exegetical  remarks  in  general,  which  may  serve  to  explain  in  detail  how  difficult  it  is  to 
adapt  this  book  to  the  Maccabsean  period,  in  the  character  of  a  pseudo-prophetical  work. 

Note  3.— With  reference  to  the  difficult,  but,  for  the  exegesis  of  this  book,  exceedingly 
important  question,  "  Which  world-kingdoms  of  the  last  pre-Christian  time  correspond  to  the 
four  characteristic  figures  of  Daniel's  monarchies  (chap.  ii.  31  et  seq.  ;  vii.  2  et  seq.)  ? "  we 
t>ffer  the  preliminary  remark,  that  the  interpretation  by  which  the  fourth  kingdom  represents 
the  Roman  supremacy — an  interpretation  which  was  accepted  by  Josephus  and  a  majority  of 
the  church  fathers,  and  which  has  become  traditional  and  is  in  almost  universal  favor — does 

•  [We  need  hardly  point  out  to  the  student  how  purely  conjectural  and  subjective  is  this  supposition  of  the  interpola 
tion  of  certain  parte  of  these  wonderful  prophecies,  nor  how  fatal  to  the  genuineness  of  the  book  ae  a  whole  Is  such  as 
fclmission.  FtilHru  In  uno,/alsus  in  omnihjui.  Who  is  to  draw  the  line  of  distinction  between  the  authentic  and  the 
•pnrious  parts  t  None  is  apparent  in  the  text,  and  if  interpreters  are  allowed  to  pick  and  choose  for  themselves  what  they 
sonceive  it  lUely  that  God  would  have  revealed,  and  what  they  may  be  free  to  attribute  to  later  hands,  the  whole  ground 
Is  virtually  conceded  to  Rationalism.  The  true  explanation  of  the  minuteness  of  the  prophecies  in  chap.  xi.  of  Daniel  lie« 
In  their  intimate  connection  with  the  ntarer  future  of  the  chosen  people,  and  the  fact  that  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  being  th« 
Bist /orefi't  persecutor  of  the  Jewish  religion  as  such,  is  set  forth  as  the  type  of  all  coming  Antichrists,] 


AUTHENTICITY  OF  TflK  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  41 

not  to  us  seem  to  meet  the  sense  of  the  prophet.*  Nor  can  we,  with  Ephraem  Synis,  Hitzig, 
Ewalcl,  Delitzsch,  and  otlieis,  find  in  this  fourth  kingdom  the  Macedonian  or  Grecian  emjjirt 
of  .Alexander  the  Great,  t'vjether  zcith  the  kingdoms  of  the  Diadochi,  which  s))rang  from  it ;  but 
instead,  tlie  divided  nature  of  tlie  fourtli  kingdom  (chap.  ii.  41)  appears  to  us  to  symbolize 
oiilp  the  on]|jire  of  the  Greek  Diadoclii  after  Alexander,  while  the  kingdom  of  Alexander  him- 
self must  be  considered  as  the  third.  See  above,  §  3  [also  §  10,  Notes  3  and  4] ;  and  compare 
the  exegesis  of  chap.  ii.  40  et  seq.  See  ibid,  in  relation  to  the  number /"o!<r  and  its  symbolical 
meaning  as  applitd  to  the  world-kingdoms.  Meanwhile  compare  Krauichfeld,  p.  oT  :  ''It  is 
an  unquestionable  peculiarity  of  Daniel  that  he  attempts  to  cover  this  period  by  four  of  such 
kingdoms ;  l)ut  the  general  application  l)y  the  Hel^rews  of  the  numl>er  four  to  extensions  of 
time  or  sprxe  is  equally  unquestioned  fcf.  tlie  four  winds,  Dan.  vii.  2;  viii.  8  ;  the  four  quar- 
ters of  the  i.eavens,  four  ages  of  the  world,  four  principal  metals,  etc.).  If  we  therefore  con- 
sider the  composer  of  the  book  to  have  been  a  person  who  estimated  the  political  condition 
of  his  time  and  its  consequences  understandingly  and  naturally,  and  at  the  same  time  clung 
decidedly  and  immovably  to  his  faith  in  the  realization  of  the  Messianic  hopes  which  rested 
on  previous  piophccies.  it  will  be  evident  that  the  Messianic  period  would  present  itself  to  his 
mind  as  connected  with  the  fourth,  i.e.,  extreme  development  of  heathen  supremacy,  which 
was  so  signilicaut  to  the  reflections  of  a  scholar  as  such;  and  this  conception  would  be  as 
natural  as  that,  for  instance,  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  in  whom  the  predominance  of  religious 
and  theocratic  tliought,  together  with  the  corresponding  subordination  of  political  inteivsts  as 
such,  produced  an  association  of  the  Messianic  period  \vith  the  fall  of  Babylon,"  etc.  See  the 
same  author,  p.  58,  in  relation  to  the  peculiarly  definite  character  of  the  chronological  predic- 
tions of  Daniel :  "  There  is  not  a  single  prediction  relating  to  a  definite  point  of  time,  in  tlie 
prophecies  of  Daniel,  which  is  not  the  expression  of  an  idea  that  would  be  perfectly  intelligible 
til  a  theocratic  contemporary  of  the  writer.  The  matiner  in  which  he  determines  a  point  of 
time  might,  indeed,  seem  to  be  somewh.at  peculiar  ;  but  this  consists  merely  in  the  astronomi- 
cally arithmetical  men.virement  of  a  current  condition  of  time,  which  reminds  us  of  Baljylon, 
the  cradle  of  astronomical  as  well  as  astrological  definitions,  and  which,  by  its  union  with  the 
thoroughly  Babylonian  feature  presented  in  the  use  of  animal  symbols,  and  with  the  gro- 
tesquely descrijitive  style  of  the  naiTative  in  general,  harmonizes  with  the  Babylonian  origin 
of  the  book.'" 

§  10.  Design  of  the  Book  op  Daniel. 

According  to  the  opponents  of  the  genuineness  of  this  book,  who  assign  it  to  tlie  M.acca- 
bsean  pcriodj  its  author  aimed  merely  to  exhort  and  comfort,  and  even  invented  the  contents 
of  the  first  or  historical  part  for  this  puqiose.  Botli  the  narratives  relating  to  the  heroic  faith 
and  steadfastness  of  Daniel  and  his  friends,  when  exposed  to  the  threatenings  and  jjci'secu- 

*  [Dr.  Pnsey,  the  latest  scholarly  advocate  of  this  reference  of  the  fourth  kingdom  to  Rome  (pagan  rather  than  papal), 
offers  the  following  special  considerations  in  its  favor  {p.  69  et  seq.);  1.  '*Even  an  opponest  (De  Wette,  in  the  IJatl. 
Encykl.  s.  v.  Daniel)  has  said,  '  It  is  in  favor  of  this  interpretation  [of  the  4th  empire  as  Roman]  that  the  two  feet 
of  iron  can  be  referred  to  the  eastern  and  western  emperors,'  "  But  so  is  the  3d  empire  described  by  the  plural  '*  breast* 
(",Tl~rT)  and  arms,"  where  the  Medo-Per?ian  coalition  affords  but  a  faint  parallel.  2.  **The  ten  horns  are  explained 
to  be  kings  or  kingdoms  which  should  issue  out  of  it.  'And  the  ten  horns  out  of  (i.e.,  going  forth  from)  this  kingdom 
are  ten  kings  that  shall  arise.*  Throughout  these  prophecies  the  king  represents  the  kingdom,  and  the  kingdom  is  con- 
centrated in  its  king.  The  kings,  then,  or  kingdoms,  which  should  arise  out  of  this  kingdom  must,  from  the  force  of 
the  term  as  well  as  from  the  context,  be  kings  or  kingdoms  which  should  arise  at  some  later  stage  of  its  existence,  not 
those  first  kings  without  which  it  could  not  be  a  kingdom  at  all."  The  force  of  this  reasoning  is  somewhat  difficult 
to  perceive,  and  its  whole  validity  is  destroyed  by  the  Masoretic  accents  of  the  text  quoted,  which  should  be  translated 
th-.i3:  '* The  ten  horns  [are]  the  kingdom  thence,  [namely]  ten  kings  [that]  shall  arise.*'  3.  "These  ten  horns  or  king- 
doms are  also  to  be  contemporaneous.  They  are  all  prior  in  time  to  the  little  horn  which  is  to  arise  out  of  them. 
*  Another  shall  arise  after  them,  and  is  diverse  from  the  rest.'  Yet  the  ten  horns  or  kingdoms  are  to  continue  on 
together  imtil  the  ele-.-enth  shall  have  risen  up  :  for  it  is  to  rise  up  among  them  and  destroy  three  of  them."  The  incon- 
clusiveness  of  this  argument  is  palpable.  Antiochns  certainly  was  later  than  his  predecessors,  but  of  the  same  line, 
and  he  displaced  three  of  them.  The  correspondence  is  as  perfect  as  could  be  desired ;  far  more  so  than  on  any  other 
BChemc.  4.  "The  period  after  the  desrructiDn  of  that  power  [the  eleventh  horn],  and  of  the  whole  fourth  kingdom  which 
i:;  to  perish  with  him,  is  indicated  by  these  words :  '  And  the  rest  of  the  beasts  (the  other  kingdoms),  their  dominion  was 
t.aken  away,  yet  their  lives  were  prolonged  on '  to  the  time  appointed  by  God.  The  sentence  seems  most  naturally  t« 
relate  to  a  time  after  the  destruction  of  the  4th  empire  ;  for  it  continues  the  description."  This  was  exactly  true  of  the 
Maccabasan  deliverance,  which  for  the  first  time  effected  the  independence  of  the  Jews  from  Antiochus.  who  was  but  the 
sequel  and  climax  of  the  long  subjugation  ever  since  the  captivity.  If  the  theory  in  question  has  no  better  support  than 
t^cse  ai-gnraents,  it  is  weak  indeed.  Its  main  prop,  as  to  pagan  Rome,  is  the  superficial  resemblance  in  the  eiTtent  and 
power  of  the  latter — whic'n  is  at  once  dissipited  when  the  prophecy  is  viewed  from  the  sfmd-roint  of  the  Jewish  martyrs  ; 
and  as  to  jytpal  Rome,  its  great  bulwark  is  the  year-for  a-day  interpretation,  with  the  ov-rthrow  of  which  it  atteilj 
falls.       The  subject  is  argacd  at  length  by  Dr.  Cowlea,  Commentary  on  Daniel,  p.  354  et  seq.] . 


42  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

tions  of  the  Babylonian  tyi'ants,  and  the  apocalyptic  visions  of  the  second  part,  were  designed 
to  admonish  the  compatriots  and  contemporaries  of  the  writer  to  "  emulate  these  men  in  theii 
tuiconquerable  faith,  as  shown  in  their  public  and  disinterested  confession  of  the  God  of  theii 
fathers,  and  to  remind  them  that  this  only  true  God  would,  at  the  proper  time,  know  how  tc 
humble  and  destroy  those  who,  like  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  should  exalt  themselves  against 
Him  in  their  reckless  pride,  and  should  seek  to  cause  His  people  to  renounce  His  service,  as 
well  as  how  to  secure  the  final  victory  to  his  faithful  and  steadfast  adherents  "  (Elock,  Eixleit., 
p.  602).  The  book,  if  really  composed  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  would  certainly 
correspond  to  this  design  but  imperfectly.  The  hortative  and  typical  bearing  of  many  of  its 
marvelous  narratives  upon  tlie  sufferings,  temptatious,  and  religious  duties  of  Israel  in  a  later 
age,  would  not  have  been  at  all  understood.  Nebuchadnezzar,  Behhazzar,  and  Darius  would 
hardly  have  been  recognized  as  types  of  that  Seleucidian  tyrant,  since  their  relations  to  the 
theocracy  were  wholly  different  from  his.  The  latter  aimed  at  the  complete  extirpation  and 
annihilation  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  would  never  have  consented  to  even  a  temporary 
recognition  of  tlie  supreme  power  and  majesty  of  the  Covenant  God  of  the  Old  Dispensation, 
such  as  was  secured  from  each  of  those  rulers  ;  and  the  cordial  relations  whicli  Daniel  main- 
tained throughout  the  exile  towards  the  Chaldean  and  Medo-Persian  heathendom,  as  chief  of 
the  Magian  caste,  and  as  an  influential  political  officer  and  confidential  adviser  of  their 
heathen  rulers,  would  certainly  have  exerted  a  forbidding  influence  on  the  narrow-minded, 
illiberal,  and  fanatically-inclined  Jews  of  Maccabaean  times,  instead  of  encouraging  them, 
quickening  their  faith,  and  inspiring  them  with  the  zeal  of  martyrs.  With  the  exception  of 
three  men  in  the  fiery  furnace,  not  a  single  really  suitable  example  would  have  been  presented 
to  tlie  martyrs  of  this  period  for  their  encouragement  and  comfort,  while,  at  the  same  time, 
the  prophetic  portions  of  the  book  would  have  been  burdened  with  much  that  was  superfluous, 
obscure,  and  incomprehensible,  and  therefore  with  much  that  contradicted  its  design  (cf.  the 
note  1  below). 

On  the  other  hand,  everything  reveals  a  definite  plan,  and  is  adapted  to  a  practical  end, 
which  is  easily  apprehended  when  it  is  examined  from  the  position  of  the  nation  during  the 
exile  and  immediately  afterward.  The  Chaldee  fragments,  chap,  ii.-vii.,  which  were  recorded 
first,  are  seen  in  this  light  to  be  a  collection  of  partly  narrative  and  partly  prophetic  testi- 
monies to  Jehovah,  as  the  only  true  God,  in  contrast  with  the  vain  gods  of  the  Babylonians. 
These  fragments  were  designed  to  strengthen  the 'faith  of  the  captives,  and  this  design  is 
indicated  by  the  unvarying  manner  in  which  each  section  closes,  viz. :  by  an  ascription  of 
praise  to  Jehovah,  which  generally  falls  from  the  lips  of  ond  of  the  heathen  sovereigns  himself 
(see  chap.  ii.  47;  iii.  28  et  seq. ;  iv.  34  ;  v.  29  ;  vi.  26  et  seq.  ;  vii.  27).  The  Hebrew  text  was 
v,ompos<'d  somewhat  later,  and  was  designed  directly  and  solely  for  Israel,  which  appears,  no"' 
only  from  the  absence  of  doxologies  expressive  of  the  triumph  of  the  faith  in  Jehovah  ovei 
the  woi-ship  of  idols,  at  the  end  of  the  several  paragraphs,  but  also  from  tlie  fact  that,  asidt 
from  the  historical  introduction  to  the  book  as  a  whole  (chap.  i.  1-ii.  4),  it  contains  only 
I)rophecies,  which  are,  moreover,  exclusively  of  a  comforting  nature.  They  are  designed  "t& 
comfort  the  Hebrew  people  in  the  trying  political  circumstances  under  which  they  are  either 
newly  engaged  in  arranging  their  affairs  in  Palestine,  or  arc  still  languishing  in  the  laud  of 
the  exile.  In  x\q\\  of  the  fact  that  to  the  human  understanding  the  duration  of  this  trying 
condition  is  unkuowu,  they  present  the  assurance  that  the  continued  and  increasing  tribula- 
tions, which  must  keep  pace  with  the  moral  corruption  of  heathendom,  are  designed  by  Ood 
Jor  the  purifying  of  tlie  faithful  (cf.  chaj).  xi.  35  ;  xii.  10),  and  cannot  he  imposed  a  single  day 
hej/oiid  what  lie  has  determined'''  (Kranichfeld,  p.  60)  ;  and  with  a  view  to  afford  a  still  more 
effectual  comfort  and  encouragement,  they  contain  repeated  references  to  the  Messianic  period 
of  salvation  (chap.  ix.  -2.5  et  seq. ;  xii.  1  et  seq.  ;  cf.  vii.  13  et  seq.),  that  long  predicted  glorious 
conclusion  at  which  the  history  of  God's  people  must  arrive  after  passing  through  many  pre- 
vious clouds  and  sliadows,  and  which  contains  in  and  of  itself  the  assurance  that  Israel  shall  ht 
taoed  out  of  every  affliction,  however  great. 

From  their  connection  with  these  comforting  prophecies,  the  older  records  relating  to  the 
marveloiis  displays  of  Divine  power  and  grace  as  -w-itnessed  by  Daniel  and  his  companions 


DESIGN  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  i3 

r.'ccive  an  additional  significance,  as  examples  tending  to  encourage,  comfort,  and  quicken 
the  faith  of  Israel  in  succeeding  ages,  and  serving,  especially  in  the  more  sad  and  troublous 
seasons,  as  shining  way-marlis  and  guiding  stars  through  tlie  dark  niglits  of  a  condition  -n 
which  God  had  apparently  forsaken  them,  although  they  were  originally  recorded  for  a  dif- 
ferent situation.  This  comforting  tendency  of  the  book,  however,  did  not  reveal  itself  fully, 
until,  as  has  been  shown  elsewhere  (§  G,  note  1),  almost  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the 
captivity,  the  religious  tyranny  of  the  Seleucidse  brought  the  full  measure  of  the  sufferings 
predicted  by  Daniel  to  l)ear  upon  Israel.  In  consequence,  this  prophetical  book,  which  up  to 
that  time  had  perhaps  been  partially  misconceived,  or  at  least  misunderstood  and  undervalued, 
attained  its  rightful  position  in  the  public  mind  ;  for  the  sufferings  of  the  time  revealed  not 
only  the  marked  keenness  of  vision  displayed  by  the  Divinely-enlightened  seer,  but  also  tlie 
fullness  of  consoling  power  contained  in  his  wonderful  narratives  and  visions.  The  Macca- 
bsean  period  served,  therefore,  to  fully  demonstrate  the  practical  design  of  the  book,  and 
thereby  to  solve  its  prophetical  riddles,  to  bring  to  view  the  depths  of  wisdom  which  underlie 
its  meditations  on  the  relations  of  the  world-powere  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  to  secure 
permanently  to  its  author  the  honorable  rank  of  the  fourth  among  the  greater  jjrophets. 

Note  1. — Havemick,  Eiid.,  11.  488,  shows  in  a  striking  manner,  the  untenable  character  of 
the  assumption  that  the  book  is  a  fiction  of  the  Maccaba;an  age,  invented  to  serve  a  purpose, 
especially  in  view  of  the  marked  difference  between  the  religious  and  political  circumstances 
of  that  time  and  those  prevailing  in  the  captivity:  "How  marked  is  the  distinction  between 
>he  heathen  kings  of  tliis  book  and  Antiochus  Epiphanes !  Collisions  with  Judaism  occur, 
indeed,  but  how  different  is  the  conduct  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  Belshazzar,  and  Darius  the 
Riede,  in  relation  to  the  re^rognition  of  Judaism  and  its  God  !  Where  is  the  evidence  in  tliis 
tase  of  a  desire  to  extirpate  Judaism,  or  to  inaugurate  a  formal  persecution  of  the  Jews,  suth 
as  entered  into  the  designs  of  Antiochus.  There  can  hardly  be  two  things  more  dissimilar 
*haii  are  the  deportment  of  a  Belshazzar  or  Darius  and  that  of  the  Soleucidian  king."  Com- 
pare page  487:  "  That  Daniel,  togetlier  with  his  companions,  receives  instruction  in  the  lan- 
guage and  wisdom  of  Chalda^a,  that  he  even  ajjpcars  as  the  head  of  the  Magian  caste,  and 
jears  a  heathen  name,  fills  political  positions  at  heathen  courts,  maintains  relations  of  intimate 
friendship  witli  heathen  princes,  and  even  manifests  the  wannest  interest  in  them  (cf.  iv.  16) — 
idl  these  are  traits  in  tliorough  harmony  witli  the  history,  and  corresponding  to  the  circum- 
rtances  resulting  from  the  captivity,  but  not  according  with  the  rigid  exclusiveness  of  the 
Maccabsean  period,"'  etc.  Cf.  Ilerbst,  Ehthit  ,  II.  2,  98 ;  Ziindel,  p.  60  et  seq.  ;  Pusey,  p.  374 
i^t  seq. 

[Note  2. — We  introduce  here,  as  an  appropriate  connection,  some  valuable  remarks  from 
Keil's  Commentary  on  Daniel  (Clark's  ed.,  Introd.,  §  ii.,  p.  5  et  seq.),  on  DanieVs place  in  the 
'listory  of  the  hinfidom-  of  Ood,  so  far  as  these  relate  to  the  chosen  people  of  Israel.  "Tlie 
lestruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  and  the  deportation  of  the  Jews  into  Babylonian  caj)- 
fivity,  not  only  put  an  end  to  the  independence  of  the  covenant  people,  but  also  to  the  con- 
linuance  of  that  constitution  of  the  kingdom  of  God  which  was  founded  at  Sinai ;  and  that 

Qot  only  temporarily  t)ut  forever,  for  in  its  integrity  it  was  never  restored 1'ie 

oholition  of  tlie  Israelitish  theocracy,  through  tlie  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  and 
(he  carrying  away  of  the  people  into  exile  by  the  Clialdicaus,  in  consequence  of  their  con- 
tinued unfaithfulness  and  the  transgressicm  of  the  laws  of  the  covenant  on  the  ])art  of  Israel, 
n'as  foreseen  in  the  gracious  counsels  of  God  ;  and  the  perpetual  duration  ef  the  covenant  of 
grace,  as  such,  was  not  dissolved,  but  only  the  then  existing  condition  of  the  kingdom  of 
3ud  was  changed,  in  order  to  winnow  that  perverse  people,  who,  notwithstanding  all  the 
chastisements  tliat  had  hitherto  fallin  upon  them,  iiad  not  in  earnest  turned  away  from  their 
idolatry,  by  that  the  severest  of  all  the  judgments  th.at  had  been  threatened  them;  to  exter- 
minate by  the  sword,  by  famine,  by  the  plague,  and  by  other  calamities,  tlie  incorrigible  mass 
of  the  people ;  and  to  jjrepare  the  better  portion  of  them,  the  remnant  who  might  repent,  as  a 
holy  seed  to  whom  God  might  fulfill  His  covenant  pronii-ses.  Accordingly  the  exile  forms  a 
great  turning-point  in  the  development  of  the  kingdom  of  God  which  He  had  founded  in 
Israel.  With  that  event  the  form  of  the  theocracy  established  at  Sinai  comes  to  an  end,  and 
then  begins  the  period  of  the  transition  to  a  new  form,  which  was  to  be  established  by  Christ, 

and  has  actually  been  established  by  Him The  restoration  of  the  Jewish  state 

after  the  exile  was  not  a  re-establishment  of  the  Old-Testament  kingdom  of  God.  T\Tien 
Cyrus  granted  liberty  to  the  Jews  to  return  to  their  own  land,  and  comii.anded  them  to  rebuild 
the  temple  of  Jehovah  in  Jerusalem,  only  a  very  small  band  of  captives  returned ;  the  greater  part 
remained  scattered  among  the  heathen.  Even  those  who  went  home  from  Babylon  to  Canaan 
were  not  set  fiee  from  subjection  to  the  heathen  world-power,  but  remained,  in  the  land  which 


44 


HARMONY  OF  DANIEL'S  PROPHECIES  OF  THE 


HiBTOBY. 

L  Babylonian  Empire. 


Chap.  II.      i 

31  Thou,  O  kine. 
sawest,  uod  behxld; 
» {Treat  im^e.  This 
great  imapi;.  whose 

Thi^  is  depicted  at  its  acme  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  at-jbriKhtness  .rtw  ex- 
taineii  the  iinivei^sal  sovereignty  of  AVestem  Asia  and  Egypt,  icellcni,  stood  be- 
Griffios  or  winged  lions  are  a  common  emblem  on  the  Assyr-  ^^''^  **'5^'  ^^^  ^^^ 

^  ■'       form    thereof    u^as 

terrible. 

32  This  imace'a 
head  was  of  fine 
gold; 

ian  !-culptures.    The  empire  subsequently  degenerated,  and, 
at  the  sjime  time,  became  more  civilized. 

II.  Persian  Empire. 

The  original  element  was  Media,  where  bears  abound.  Persia 
was  the  hi^^her  horn  and  more  elevated  side.  The  three  ribs 
are  probably  Lydia,  Assyria,  and  Babylonia,  which  were  sue 
ce=^ively  absorbed  by  Cyrus.  He  was  victorious  in  every  di- 
rection except  eastward.  The  king-?  following  him  were 
Cambyse:^;  '1.  Smerdis;  3.  Darius  liystaspis;  4  Xerses,  who 
first  exerted  all  his  resources  against  Greece. 
III.  Mac^doniiin  Empire. 

Copper  denotes  the  mercenary  Greeks.  The  leopard  repre- 
sents their  slyness  and  pertinacity.  The  four  wings  are  indie 
ative  of  doubly  velocity.  Alexander  marched  with  unexam- 
pled rapidity.    He  was  the  sole  ruler  of  his  dynasty.    His  do- 


ClIAP.  II.  1 

37  Thou,Okmp,«rtakiDK' 
of  k'Migs :  for  the  Uod  of 
heaven  hath  loven  thee  a 
klnph'in ,  power,  tuid 
strent;lh,Hnd  jjlorj. 

3.>  And  whereS'iL'ver  the 
childreu  of  men  dwell,  the 
beasts  of  the  tield  and  the 
fowls  of  the  hesTcn  hiith  he 
II  into  thine  hand,  and 
huth  made  ihee  ruler  over 
them  all.  Thou  art  tliis 
head  of  gold. 


his  breast  and  bis 
arms  of  silver. 


his  belly  and   his 
lliigba  of  brass, 


minions  were  diWded,  shortly  aiter  his  premature  death,  be- 
tween, 1.  Ptolemy,  in  Kgypt  and  the  Mediterranean  coast ;  2, 
St'leucuj,  in  Asia ;  3.  Lysimachus,in  Thrace ;  4.  Cassauder,  in 
Greece. 

IV.  Sfjrian  Monarchy. 
This  was  of  a  mongrel  character,  the"^ native  Oriental  ele-  33  Hislepofiron, 
ment  corresponding  to  the  clav,  and  the  foreign  Greek  to  the  *i'^  feet  part  of  iroc 
iron     These  were  combined  iii  all  sorts  of  affinities.     The  ten  andp"tcf  i^ay- 
toes  m:iy  symbolize  the  numerous  satrapies  which  fell  to  the 
ehare  of  Seieuciis.     This  dynasty  is  depicted  as  fierce,  from 
contrast  with  the  lenient  governments  pieceding,  and  especial- 
ly from  its  iotolerauce  towards  the  Jewish  religion. 


\.' Sdencxts  Nicator  was  orig^inally  Ptolemy's  general  at 
Eabvlon,  but  soon  managed  to  secure  not  only  the  entire  Kast, 
but  also  the  province  of  >yria  [including  Palestine).  2.  Anii- 
orhirs  Sii'rr  was  engrossed  with  subduing  the  Gauls.  3.  .471- 
lin-hvR  '/Vnvj.s  madt-  pence  with  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  by  mar- 
rvin_'  Bfrr.nice.hig  daughter;  but  soon  repudiated  her  in  favor 
of  Lat'xlic-^.  liis  former  wife,  who  revenged  herself  by  poisoning 
him  and  killing  her  rival  with  her  infant. 


Berenice's  brother, 
Ptolemy  Euergetes.  avenged  her  death  by  invading  Syria,  car- 
rying away  immenae  spoiL 


4.  SrleticitR  Callinirns  attempted 
to  retaliate  by  attacking  the  Eg\-ptlan  provinces  [translate,  ver. 
'.t.  "And  he  (the  king  of  the  north)  shall  come  into  the  king- 
dom of  the  king  of  the  south"],  but  was  forced  to  retire  with 
defeat,  ft.  SeU-iiciix  Cfrfiunuf^  his  son,  renewed  the  attempt, 
hut  W.1S  -"lain  ;  and  hin  brother,  6.  Antiochm  the  G'rcaf^  push 
e.l  the  campaign  to  the  border  of  ICgj'pt. 

This  roused  Ptolemy 
Philopntor,  who  aspembled  an  aimy,  with  which  he  totally  rout- 
ed Antiochus  at  Gaza;  but  he  then  concluded  a  truce  with 
him 


Bpoil: 


Fourteen  years  afterwards,  AntiochuH  returned  with  the 
of  Uh  liuateru  campaigns  to  renew  hid  deeigns  against 


39  And  after  thee  Efaall 
rise  another  klDgdom  io 
t'ehor  to  thee, 


cuAP.  vn. 

2  Daniel  sfoke  and  said,  I 
saw  in  uiy  vibioo  by  niclit, 
and,  behuld,  the  four  winds 
of  the  heaTcD  strove  upiju  thd 
trreal  &ea. 

d  And  fonr  great  beasU 
came  up  from  the&ea,diveise 
one  from  another. 

i  4  The  first  was  like  s  Hon, 
.and  had  eagle's  wings : 

I  beheld  till  the  wings  there- 
of were  plucked,  and  it  waa 
lilted  up  from  the  earth,  and 
made  stand  upon  the  feet  aa 
a  man,  and  a  man's  heart 
was  given  to  it. 

S  And  behold  another  beast, 
a  second,  like  to  a  bear,  and 
it  raised  up  itself  on  one  aide, 
and  it  had  three  ribs  in  the 
mouth  of  it  between  the  teeth 
of  it:  and  they  said  thus  unto 
it,  Atiae,  devour  much  fleab. 


and  another  third  l:incdom 
of  brass,  which  shall  bear 
rule  over  all  the  earth. 


6  Afler  this  I  beheld,  and  lo 
another,  like  a  lenpard, which 
had  upon  the  back  of  it  four 
wings  of  a  fowl ;  the  beast 
had  also  four  heads ;  and  do* 
minion  was  given  to  it. 


40  And  the  fonrtb  kingdom 
ihall  t>e  strong  as  iron  ;  for- 
ismuch  as  iron  brenketb  in 
pieces  and  subdueth  all 
ffiinQs:  and  as  inm  that 
breaketh  all  these,  shall  it 
break  in  pieces  and  bruise. 

41  And  whereas  thou  saw- 
est  the  feet  and  toes,  part  of 
potters'  clay,  and  part  of 
iron,  the  kingdom  shall  be 
divided  ;  but  there  shall  be 

it  of  the  strength  of  the 
iron,  forasmuch  as  thou  saw- 
est  the  iron  mixed  with  miry 
clay. 

And  as  the  toes  of  the 
feet  tf«i-f  part  of  iron  and 
part  of  clay,  so  the  kingdom 
shall  be  partly  strong  and 
partly  broken. 
^i  And  whereas  thou  saw- 
est  iron  mixed  with  miry 
clay,  they  shall  mingle 
themselves  with  the  seed 
of  men  :  bnt  they  shall  not 
cleave  one  to  another,  even 
03  iron  is  not  mixed  with 
clay. 


^  After  this  I  saw  in  th9 
night  visions,  and  behold  a 
fourth  beast,  dreadful  and 
terrible,  and  strong  exceed- 
ingly ;  and  it  had  great  iron 
teeth  :  it  devoured  and  brake 
in  pieces,  and  stamped  the 
residue  with  the  feet  of  it : 
and  it  was  diverse  from  all 
the  beasts  that  were  before 
it; 


and  it  had  tea  huiatt 


FOUR  GREAT  ORIENTAL  KINGDOMS. 


45 


Chap.  ^^I.         Cuap.  VIL 


17  Thest  great 
betists.  wnich 
four,  art  four  kintrs, 
whiei  shall  arise 
out  of  the  earth 


19  Then  I  wonM 
know-  the  truth  of 
the  fourth  hi-ast, 
which  was  diversi.' 
from  all  the  others, 
exceedinirttreailful, 
whi^setteth  irerff 
iron,  nnO  hirt  nnils 
(■/■brass;  wAiVA  (l^^- 
voured,  (jrak«  in 
pieces,  and  Blnmiied 
the  res:dat:  with  ois 
feet. 


23  Thns  he  said, 
The  fourth  beast 
sbal)  be  the  fourth 
kingdom  ui>on 

eirth.  which  shall 
bf  diverse  from  all 
kin^dotnB,aud§hall 
devour  the  w 
earth,  and  shall 
trend  it  down,  and 
break  it  is  pieces. 


Cbap.  \TIL 


Chap.  Vm. 


3  Then  I  lifted  op  mine  eyes,  and  mw,  an3,  30  The  ntm  which 
behold,  there  stood  before'  the  ri\'er  a  ram  thou  sawest  having 
which  had  fin?  horns  :  and  the  firo  horns  irtre  (i«>  horns  are  the 
hich ;  but  one  va*  higher  than  the  other,  kings  of  Media  and 


and  the  higher  came  up  last. 

4  I  saw  the  mm  pushing  westward,  and 
northward,  and  southward  :  so  that  no  bea&te 
might  stand  before  hini,neithertma<Afr«  an^ 
that  could  deliver  out  of  his  hand  ;  but  he  did 
according  to  his  will,  and  became  great. 

5  And  aa  I  was  oonsidering,  behold,  a  he- 
goat  came  from  the  west  on  the  face  of  the 
wholee&rth.nntl  touched  not  the  ground  :  and 
the  gnat  idcf  a  notable  horn  between  his  eyes. 

6  And  he  came  to  the  ram  that  had  fm> 
horns,  which  I  had  &een  standing  before  the 
river,  and  ran  unto  him  in  the  fnr^'  of  his 
power, 

7  And  I  saw  him  come  close  unto  the  ram, 
and  he  was  moved  with  choler  against  him, 
and  smote  the  ram,  and  brake  his  two  boms : 
and  there  was  no  power  in  the  ram  lo  etand 
before  him,  but  be  cast  him  down  to  the 
ground,  and  stamped  upon  him:  and. there 
was  none  that  could  deliver  tb«  ram  out  of 
hia  hand. 

8  Therefore  the  he-^at  waxed  very  great : 
and  when  he  was  strong,  the  great  horn  was 

ikcii ;  and  for  it  there  came  op  four  nota- 
ble o&ca  toward  the  four  winda  of  heaven. 


Persia. 


1  And  the  rnogh 
goat  it  the  king  of 
Grecia ;  and  the 
Igreat  horn  that 
between  his  eyes  ia 
the  first  king. 


?2  Now  that  be. 
ing  brok«n,  where- 
as four  stood  ut)  for 
it,    four    kiiiguoi 
shall  eland   up  o 
of  the    nation,  b 
not  in  his  power. 


Chap.  XL 


2  And  now  wiU  I  shew  thee  the  tmth.  Beheld, 
there  shall  stand  ud  yet  three  kitijrs  in  Prrtia; 
and  the  fourth  ahalj  be  iiar  richer  than  tkey  all : 


and  by  his  strength  through  bis  riches  he  shall 
stir  op  all  against  the  realm  of  Grecia, 
3  And  a  mighty  king  shall  stand  up.  thot  shall 
rule  with  gr«at  dominion,  and  do  according  to  bjfl 
wUL 


20  And  of  tho  ten 
boms  that  ictrt  in 
bis  head, 


?4  And  the  ten 
homs  out  of  this 
kingdom    art 

:s     that     shall 
arise: 


4  And  when  be  ehall  stand  up,  hie  kingdom, 
shall  be  br^'ken.and  shell  be  di\nded  tcwura  the 
four  winds  of  heaven  :  and  not  to  his  posterily, 
nor  according  to  his  dominion  which  he  rulea; 
for  his  kingdom  shall  be  plucked  op,  even  for  oth- 
eia  beeides  thofie. 


5  And  the  king  of  Qie  south  shall  be  Ertrong,  ant 
ime  of  his  princes  ;  and  he  shall  be  strong  above 
bim,  and  have  dominion  ;  his  dominion  aall  it  a 
great  dominion. 

6  And  in  the  eod  of  years  they  shall  join  tliem- 
eelves  Logeiher ;  for  the  king's  daughter  of  the 
sonlh  shall  rouie  t"the  king  of  the  north  to  mnke 
an  agreeuient :  bat  she  shall  not  retain  th«  power 
of  the  arm ;  neither  shall  he  stand,  nor  his  nrin  : 
but  she  shall  be  given  up,  and  they  that  hrouglix 
her,  and  bethnt  begat  her,  and  helJiat  strenglb- 
ened  her  in  Oitaf  times. 

7  But  out  of  a  branch  ofher  roots  shall  oiM  stand 
up  in  his  estat«i,  which  ehall  <-onie  with  tin  «rn;v, 
and  shall  enter  int«i  the  fortress  of  the  king  i  l  tf.e 
north,  and  &baU  d^al  against  them,  and  shall  pre- 
vail. 

S  And  shall  also  rarry  captiyes  into  Eg^■pt  their 
gods,  with  thoir  primes,  and  with  their  precioua 
ressels  of  silver  and  of  gold ;  and  he  shall  (on- 
limie  irtortf  years  than  the  king  of  the  north. 

9  So  the  king  of  (he  south  shall  come  into  hii 
kingdom,  and  shall  return  into  his  uivn  land, 

10  Bat  his  sons  shall  be  stirred  up,  and  shall  as- 
semble a  multitude  of  great  forces  :  ami  ■mr  i^liiill 
certainly  come,  find  overflow,  ami  pajs  ll, rough 
then  shall  he  ret^im,  and  be  stirriAi  up.  ttru  lo 
bis  fertress. 

11  And  the  king  of  the  :so(ith  ehall  be  moved 
ijth  choler,  and  shaJl  come  forth  and  fight  with 

him.  *i-tn  with  the  king  of  the  north:  nnd  he 
shall  Set  ft'rth  a  great  multitude  ;  but  the  multi- 
tude shall  ho  given  into  liis  hand. 

12  Ami  when  he  hath  tiiheu  uway  the  multi- 
tude, his  heart  shtill  be  lilted  up;  and  he  shall 
cast  down  many  u-n  thousands  :  but  be  shall  not 
be  strengthened  by  it. 

13  For  the  king  of  the  north  shall  return,  and 
shall  set  forth  a  multitude  greater  than  the  for- 
mer, and  shall  certainly  come  after  certain  yeara 
with  a  great  aruiy  ai.d  with  much  richee. 


46 


HARMONY  OF  DANIEL'S  PROPHECIES  OF  THE 


the  Egyptian  provinces,  and,  witti  the  assistunce  of  a  party  of 
the  Jews,  lie  defeated  the  I'gypti.in  general  at  the  ^.mrces  of 
the  J'>nlan,  be-ieged  and  capiured  the  reuminder  of  the  Egyp- 
tian force  in  Zid-.n,  and  t:ot  full  jHise^^.-^ion  of  Palestine  He 
now  roncludo<i  a  holl-.w  alliance  with  Pt..leiiiy  Kpiphane?,  giv- 
inghim  his  dauu'hter(Jleopatra,withtlie  Palestinian  provinces 
as  a  d"wiy,  h«iping  Hi'it  ■'''"'  would  fav..r  his  ptirpL).-es,  an  ex- 
pectation in  which  he  wag  ultimately  di^-appointed.     lie  then 


turned  his  amis  against  the  Greek  colonies  of  Asia  Minor  and 
the  .I'.gBean  till  checked  by  the  Romans  under  ^cipio,  who  com- 
pelled him  to  sue  for  peace  on  the  iwist  humiliating  tenui'.  He 
wa^  killed  while  attempting  to  plunder  a  temple  in  his  own 
dominions.  7.  Selrttcti-s  l'hUopa>or  was  engrossed  with  efforts 
to  raise  the  enormoii.s  tine  imposed  by  tlie  Romans  upon  his 
father  as  the  nrice  of  peace,  and  was  at  length  assassinated  by 
his  minister,  S.  IJclmdortis^vrho  held  the  throne  a  short  time, 
although.  9.  Dmin-trius  Soler,  son  of  the  last  king,  was  right- 
fully heir,  and,  10.  Piolerny  PhiUniu-tnr  was  entitled  to  the 
Palestinian  provinces  by  virtue  of  his  mother's  dower  right. 

11.  Antiochus  KpiruANF8,biotherofSeleucus,  artfully  and 
quietly  secured  ihy  succession,  expelling  Heliodorus,  and  ig- 
noring the  claims  of  his  nep*iews  Demetrius  and  Ptolemy. 
(Daniel  styles  him  ^' vile,"  in  contrast  witli  his  surname  '■*'il- 
lu^irious,"  and  notes  the  Helleniziug  cormptions  of  his  reign 
in  Judaea,  as  detailed  below.)    The  guardians  of  the  latter 


prince  resenting  tIiL=.  a  struggle  ensned,  in  wtiich  Antiochus 
twic  ■  defeated  the  Kgyptians  in  a  pitclied  battle  on  their  own 
borders.  He  then  pretended  to  make  a  trnce  with  them,  but 
only  used  it  as  a  cover  for  entering  Egypt  with  a  small  force, 
and  seizing  quietly  upon  the  capital  and  other  points.    On  his 


return  from  his  second  campaign  into  Egypt,  he  endeavored  to 
carry  out  the  schem.-  of  introducing  Greek  customs  among  the 
Jews,  In  a  third  campaign  he  continued  his  successes,  and  in 
a  fourtli  he  was  likely  to  capture  Alexandria  and  reduce  the 
wliole  Egyptian  power,  wlien  he  was  peremptorily  ordered  to 
de^i?t  by  the  Romans.     On    is  way  Ivome  he  vented  his  cha- 


grin af  tin's  fnterference  upon  the  unhappy  Jews,  in  whose 
quarrels  lie  meddled,  deposing  the  hij,'h-priest,  aboli-hing  th 
wacriticiai  offering-',  interdicting  the  ritual,  and  bitterly  per.^e- 
eu ting  all  whurefus^-d  to  apostatize  to  puganism.  'I'lie  Temple 
remained  closed  to  all  but  heathen  victims  for  three  years  and 
a  lialf  (t290^days),  and  was  shortly  afterwards  lededicated  on 
Dec.  *25,  U.C.  Iii5(makiiig  1335  days),  six  and  a  half  years  ('2300 
days)  from  the  first  act  of  piofanation  in  the  removal  of  the  le- 
gitimate pontiff  Antiocliurt's  disregard  for  even  the  native 
deitie*  is  evident  from  his  renewal  of  bis  father's  attempt  to 
plunder  the  temple  of  the  Syrian  Venus.  Vet  be  made  the 
most  violent  efforts  to  introduce  the  worship  of  Jupiter  Oapi- 
toliauB. 


CUAP.  II. 


Cii.vr.  II. 


cuAp.  vn. 


8  I  considered  the 
horns,  and,  bebolil, 'and    o/  the    otBef 
thert       came       ui:^which  came  ap,  ajid 
auioaglheni  anoth-  before  whom  three 
little  horo,  W-  fell ;  even   (/  that 
fore    whom    there  horn  that  had  tye3, 
ere   three  of  theiand  a  mouth   that 
fir&t  horns  plucked  spake    ven,"    ^eat 
up   by   the   roots  :  things,  whose  look 
and,  tehold,  in  this  troa  more  stout  tliaa 
hom  leere  eyes  like  his  fellows, 
the   eyes    of  man, 
da  mouth  speak- 
ing Te^t  things. 


34  Thon  sawestj 
till  that  a  stone 
was  cut  out  with- 
oQt  hands,  which 
smote  the  imacre 
upon  his  feet  that 
ice       of   iron    and 

, ,  an  brake 
them  to  pie    ^. 

35  Then  was  the 
iron,  the  rUy.  the 

■»,  the  silver, 
and  the  gold,  bro- 
ken to  pieces  to- 
irether.  and  became 
like  the  chaff  of  the 
summer  threshinp- 
"oors;  and  the  wind 
carried  them  away 
that  no  place  was 
found    for    them 


The  remainder  of  his  refgn  is  obscure,  mving  to  the 
nearly  total  los?  of  the  ancient  records  concerning  it.  We  have 
therefore  but  slight  intimations  of  the  final  expedition  against 
Egypt,  etc.,  referred  to  by  Daniel  as  being  so  successful.  It 
Vi  ceitain,  however,  that  the  last  art  of  his  reign  was  a  cam- 
paign iu  the  north-eastern  provinces,  and  tlmt  he  perished 
misi-rnhly  (one  account  says  as  a  raving  maniiicl  as  he  was 
hastening  to  the  support  of  his  generjiI»*,who  had  been  defeated 
by  the  Jewish  patriots  and  zealot^.  The  Maccabee-*  had  raised 
ttie  sttndard  of  civil  and  relipioiis  liberty  in  Jii-'a*!,  and,  after 
a  long  and  severe  stm^gle,  tlie  Jews  frcured  tlieir  independ- 
ence. This  they  lY-tained  for  a  century,  n  period  of  <rri-rtt  po- 
litifil  and  «pintiial  prosj>prity  in  g-neral,  which  Daniel  and 
the  other  prophet!*  sttpak  of  in  such  glowing  temra  n^  being  in-  s"""'*^  ^^  imnce 
tro.luctory  to  the  Messianic  times,  the  Gospel  ^'kingdom  <rf|['^'""'"^  "  J^m 
Heaven,"  never  to  end.  L"the  wholl^rth] 


nnd  the  otone  thnt 


44  And  in  the 
davs  of  these  kinjrs 
shall  the  God  of 
heaven  set  up  a 
kiiig-dom  which 
shall  never  be  de- 
stroyed ;  and  the 
kingdom  shall  not 
be  left  to  other  peo- 

Ele,  but  it  shall 
reak  in  pieces  and 
consume  all  these 
kinpdoms,  and  it 
shall  stmd  firever. 
45  Fonisinuch  as 
thou  sawest  that 
the  stone  was  cut, 
outnfthemonntain; 
without  hands, and' 
that  it  brake  ir 
pieces  the  imn,  thi 
brass,  the  clay,  the' 
silver,  and  the  irold.' 
the  [Treat  God  hath 
made  known  to  iht 
kin^  whnt  shall 
come  to  pas^  here- 
after :  and  thf 
dream  is  certain, 
and  the  interprets' 
tioD  ( 


11  I  beheld  then, 
because  ol'the  voice 
of  the  preat  w.-rda 

hich  the  horo 
spake, 


9  I  beheld  till  the  I  beheld  even  till 
throne:^  were  ciibt'tbe  beast  waaslaii), 
donii,  and  the  An- luid  his  body  de- 
lient  of  days  did  stroyed,  and  civen 
sit,  whose  t'cnaeutito  the  burning 
white  as  snow,  flame. 


and  the  hair  of  his 
head  like  the  pure 
wool  :  his  throne 
wa»  like  the  fiety 
llaine,      and      h 


12  As  concerning 
the  rest  of  the 
beasts,  they  had 
their  dominion  tak- 
away :  yet  their 


vheels  aa  buminc  livtrs  were  prolone- 

fire.  ed  for  s  season  and 

K'  A  fiery  stream 

issued     aud 

forth    from    before 

him  :         thousand 

thousands 

tered  unto  him,  and 
!ten  thousand  times 

ten  thousand  stood 

before  him  :  the 
Ijudinnent  was  set^ 

and  the  hooks  were 

opened, 

13  I  saw  in  the 
nicht  visions,  and. 
heho!d,OTif  like  the 
Son  of  man  came 
with  the  clouds  of 
heaven,  and  came 
to  the  Ancient  of 
days,  and  they 
brouirht  him  near 
before  him 

14  And  there  was 
piven  him  domin^ 
ion,  and  clory,  and 
a  kingdom,  tSat  all 
people,  nations,  and 
lansiiaees  should 
serve  him  ;  hia  do- 
minion IS  an  ever- 
lasting 


H  But  the  saints 
.  of  thf   Moat  Hieh 

h  shall  not i)iss  ahal'  take  the  kine- 

iivav.-n.lhiftkinT-Mom.  =nd  posses* 
)mi'  that  whic'l|the  kinedom  forfv 
shall  not  b3  de-'er.  even  farever 
stroyed.  |sod  e^er. 


FOUR  GREAT   ORIENTAL  KINGDOMS. 


47 


Chap.  VII. 


Chap.  VIII. 


and  another  ihall 
riae  niter  (hem  \ 
and  he  shtUl  W-  di- 
verse from  theiirsl, 
and  he  shail  Bubdue 
three  kin^. 


9  An-l  out  of  one 
of  them  came  forth 
u  iitilu  horn,  whichi 
ivc^ed  excetdin^r 
prcjit.  tonnrd  tht 
south,  rjid  toward 
the  cost,  and  to-j 
ward  the  plea&ant 
land. 

1 1  And  it  wn.ted 
(Treat,  even  to 
host  of  heavi 
and  it  csst  down 
tome  of  the  host  and 
of  the  cLirs  to  the 
ground,  rr.d  stamp- 
ed ujion  them. 


&1  I  beheld,  and 
the  &aui«  bom 
mude  war  wit)i  the 
saints,  and  nrt-vail- 
ed  n;niinst  tlit-oi  -, 

-.'5  And  he  shull 
•peak  tfreul  w>>ri!s 
aiTtiinst  the  Mcst 
HiL'h,  and  hIimU 
wear  out  the  stiints 
of  the  Moat  Hi::h, 
and  think  to  (himire 
times  ""••  ""ws  : 
and  tney  snail  be 
E'lven  into  blehainl 
until  a  time  and 
timed  and  the  di- 
viding of  time,         j 

22  Until  the  An-j 
cient  of  days  came, 
and  judf^Dent  wju 
given  to  the  a;iiiils 
of  the  MoBt  Hit-h; 
and  the  time  came, 
that  the  saints  yos-' 
9e»ned  thekinudiiiii, ' 

•2f,  But  the  jii.lir- 
nieiit  shall  sit.  :i.id 
thev  shall  t.tke 
away  his  dominion. 
to  consume  -"nd  In 
destroy-  it  unto  the 
«nd. 


11  Yea.  he  mnjnil- 
Bed /..';-..#// even  to 
ttie  i>rriiiL.  t.f  the 
,hu£(,  and  Ijv  him 
[the  daily  a<i^ri»f 
was  taken  aw«v. 
landthevlsceolhii 
■Btnctuorv  was  cast 
jdown.     * 

.  12  Ai'il  ahost  was 
ipiven  /itm  mrainst 
the  daily  tarrijiee 
hy  reason  of  trans- 
frression.  and  it  cast 
down  the  truth  to 
the  irround  ;  find  it 
jiractiseil  and  [>ro3- 
.j.iTeil. 

i  13  Then  I  heard 
one  saint  spenkinr. 
and  anothT  saint 
»iid  unto  that  cer- 
tnin  .viint  which  I 
spake.  How  long! 
sfia/l  he  the  vision' 
ronrernivj  the  dai- 
ly wrrrftV*.  nnd  the 
trnnazression  of. 
HeS'>l,''!ioTi.  to  cive 
ho'h  the  <>anctuarv 
ond  the  host  to  he 
Iroddpn  under  foot  ? 

U    And    he    sHid 
t'ntn  t 


tho. 


nUndlhr* 


hundred  daya; then 
shall  til"  STnrtiinrj' 
be  cIeao:;ed. 


5*  And  the  kini 
doni  and  dominioE 
and   the   preatneaa 
of  the  kingdom  un- 
der the  whole  heav- 
en, shall  he  eiven 
I"  the  perrle  of  i lip 
s-'nt*  of  the  MoM 
Hlffli,  whose  kinp- 
doii  it  an  everlnj 
inc    kinertom.    and 
all  dominion"  'hall 
aerveandobey  hin 


CUAP.  XI. 

14  And  in  those  times  there  shall  many  stand  ap 
against  the  king  of  Uie  south  :  also  the  robbers  of  thy 
uefjple  shall  exalt  themselves  to  estMblisb  the  vision*; 
bat  they  shall  tail. 

15  So  the  king  of  the  north  shall  come,  and  cast  up  n 
mound,  and  take  the  most  tenced  i-itie:s:  uud  the  arms  of 
the  south  shall  not  withstand,  neither  his  chosen  peo- 
ple, neither  shall  thert  Ik  amj  strength  to  wilhstana. 

l(i  But  he  that  cometh  against  him  shall  do  according 
to  his  own  will,  and  none  shall  stand  before  him  ;  and 
he  shall  stand  in  the  glorious  land,  whith  by  his  hand 
shall  be  consumed. 

17  He  shall  also  set  his  face  to  enter  with  the  strength 
of  his  whole  kingdom,  and  upriirht  one^  with  h: 
thus  shall  he  do:  and  he  shall  pre  him  the  dnnghter 
of  women,  corrupting  her:  but  she  shall  not  stand  on 
hit  aide,  neither  be  for  him. 

18  After  this  shall  he  turn  his  face  unto  the  Isles,  and 
shall  take  many  :  but  a  prince  for  his  cwn  behalf  shall 
cause  the  retroach  otTered  by  him  to  cease :  without  his 
own  r^roacli  he  shall  cause  it  to  turn  upon  him. 

ID  Then  he  shall  turn  his  face  towaril  the  fort  of  hit 
own  land:  but  he  shall  stumble  and  fall,  and  not  be 
found. 
3(1  Then  shall  stand  up  in  his  estatp  a  raiser  of  taxes 
in  the  glory  of  the  kingdom  :  but  within  few  days  he 
shall  be  destroyed,  neither  in  anger,  nor  in  battle. 
33  And  in  the  lat-|  ■>!  And  in  his  estate  ^hall  stand  up  a  vile  iHiTflon,  to 
l«r  time  of  their  whom  thev  shall  not  give  the  honor  of  the  kingdom  : 
kingdom,  when  the  bm  he  shall  come  in  peaceablv,  and  obwin  the  kingdom 
transgressors       are  by  llatteries. 

como  to  the  full,  a  jjo  And  with  the  arms  of  a  flood  shall  they  he  over- 
king  of  fierce  •  oun-  flown  from  before  him,  and  shall  be  broken  ■  y*a,  also 
ton.ince, and  under-  the  prince  of  the  covenant. 

stjinding  d:!rk  sen-    03  And  after  the  league  uiade  with  him  he  shall 
tcnces,  shall  stand  dereitfullv:    for  he  shall   come  up,  and  shall  become 
up.  strong  with  n  small  people. 

24  He  shall  enter  peaceably  even  upon  the  fattest 
places  of  the  province  ;  and  Ke  shall  do  that  which  his 
fathers  have  not  done,  nor  his  fathers'  fathers  ;  he  shall 
scatter  among  them  the  prey,  and  spoil,  and  riches 
yea,  and  he  shall  forecast  bis  devices  against  the  stron; 
Dolds,  even  for  a  time. 

25  .\nd  he  shall  stir  up  his  power  and  his  courage 
against  the  king  of  the  south  with  a  great  army ;  and 
the  king  of  the  aoutn  shall  be  stirred  up  to  l>Hltli 
a  very  great  and  mighty  army  ;  but  he  shall  not 
stand  ;  for  they  shall  forecast  devices  against  h 

26  Vea.  they  that  feed  of  the  portion  of  his  meat  shall 
destroy  him,  and  his  army  shall  overflow  :  and  many 
shall  fall  down  slain. 

27  And  both  these  kings'  hearts  slialthe  to  do  mischief, 
and  they  shall  speak  lies  at  one  table;  hut  it  shall  not 
prosper  :  for  yet  the  end  shall  he  at  the  time  appointed. 

2^*  Then  shall  he  return  into  his  land  with  great  rich- 
es :  and  his  heart  s/iall  be  against  the  holy  covenant ; 
and  he  shall  do  irf-h/it*.  and  return  to  his  own  land. 

29  At  the  time  appointed  he  shall  return,  and  come 
toward  the  south  ;  hut  it  shall  not  be  as  the  former,  or 
as  the  latter. 

30  For  the  ships  of  Chittiin  shall  come  against  him 
therefore  he  shall  he  grieved,  and  return,  and  have  in 
dignation  agninst  the  holy  covenant :  so  shall  he  do; 
he  shall  even  return,  and  have  intelligence  with  them 
that  forsake  the  holy  covenant, 

94  And  his  power  :>,\  And  aims  shall  stand  on  his  part,  and  thev  shaM 
shall  he  m-ghty.  pr,||ute  the  sjincturv  of  strength,  and  shall  lake  awav 
but  I'Ot  by  his  own  the  dailv  tarriiife,  and  they  shall  place  the  ahominn'- 
jww.r    andheshall  tiun  that  maketh  desolate. 

destroy  wonderful-]  33  And  such  as  do  wickedly  asainst  the  covenant  shall 
ly.  and  shall  pros-  he  corrupt  hv  flatteries :  but  the  people  that  do  know 
per.  and  practise,  their  God  shall  be  strong,  and  do  exf'/.-itn. 
and  shall  destroy,  Xt  And  thev  that  understand  among  the  people  shall 
t'je  inightv  and  tie  instruct  manv  :  vel  tlipv  shall  fall  bv  the  sword,  and 
holy  people.  iby  flame,  bv  cnptivilv.  and  hv  ppoil,  manv  dnvs. 

25  And  throueh|  34  Sov  when  tbev  shall  fall,  thev  shall  be  holpen 
his  policy  also  he  with  a  little  help:  but  manv  shall  cleave  to  them  with 
shall  cause  craft  to  flatteries. 

prosperinhishaiid:]  35  And'«n»*  of  them  of  understanding  shall  fall,  to 
and  he  shall  mng-,try  them,  and  lo  puree,  and  to  make  r/.^m  white,  even 
nify  hinistlf  in  his  to  the  time  of  the  end  :  because  i(  in  vet  for  a  time  ap- 
heart.and  hy  peacelpninted. 

shall  destroy  many  ,  35  ^nd  the  king  shall  do  according  to  his  will;  and 
ho  shall  also  stand  |he  shall  exalt  himself,  and  marnify  himself  above  ev- 
■■••  against  the  ,.r-^-  ^.^d^  and  shall  sjieak  marvellous  things  against  the 
God  of  gods,  and  shall  prosper  till  the  indignntion  he 
accomplished  :  for  that  that  is  determined  shall  be 
done. 
37  Neither  shall  he  regard  the  god  of  his  fathers,  nor 
the  desire  of  women,  nor  regard  anv  god  :  for  he  shall 
but  he  shall  he  bro-  niflfriifv  himself  above  all. 

ken  without  hand.  ;yi  But  in  his  estate  shall  he  honor  the  God  of  forces : 
26  And  the  vision  and  a  god  whom  hrs  fathers  knew  not  shall  he  honor 
of  the  evening  and  jwiti,  poM.  nn<l  silver,  and  with  precious  stones,  and 
the  morning  whichlpieaannt  thinga. 

"'""  *""''  •■  *""■ "  W  Thus  shall  he  do  in  the  most  strong  holds  with  a 
sfrwnse  god,  whom  he  shall  acknowledge  and  Increase 
w  th  glory ;  «nd  he  shall  cause  them  to  rule  over  many, 
and  shall  divide  the  land  for  gain, 
4ri  And  at  the  time  of  the  eml  shall  the  king  of  th.- 
south  push  at  him:  and  the  king  of  the  north  shall 
come  against  him  like  a  whirlwind,  with  chariots,  and 
with  horsemen,  and  with  manv  ships ;  and  he  shall  cn- 
t*"r  into  the  rountries.  and  sha!^  overflow  and  pass  over. 

41  He  shall  nnter  also  into  the  glorious  land,  and  many 
ftntnlrifn  shall  be  overthrown  .  but  these  shall  escape 
out  oi  his  hand,  rvn  Ednm,  and  Moab,  and  the  chief 
of  the  children  of  Ammnn. 

42  He  shall  stntch  forth  his  hand  also  upon  the  coun- 
tries :  and  the  I"nd  of  Etrvpt  shall  not  escape. 

A%  But  he  shall  have  power  over  the  treasures  of  gold 
and  "f  «iU-er.  and  overall  t^f  pmclous  things  of  Egypt : 
and  the  I.i'^vans  nnd  the  Fthiopinns  ^haJl  hr  at  his  steps. 

44  But  ti'iinffB  out  of  th-  east  and  ont  of  the  north 
shall  trouble  him:  therefore  he  shall  go  forth  with 
■TTf.it  fiirv  to  destroy,  and  utterly  to  make  awiv  manv. 

45  And  he  shall  p'-nt  t^-e  tihi^rmrles  of  hTs  pnln're 
hetH-e»n  the  se^S  in  the  c'orioufi  holv  mctint.«'n  ;  yet  b« 
shall  come  to  his  end,  and  none  shall  help  him. 


Prince  of  princes ; 


told    i 

wherefore  shut 

thon  up  the  vinion  ; 
for  it  »hall  be  for 
many  days, 


Cbap.  XII. 


CuAP.  XIL 


1  And  I  heard  the 
man  clothed  in  lin- 
en, which  wadnpoii 
the  waters  of  tie 
river,  wln;n  hehebl 
up  his  right  hanil 
and  his  left  ham' 
unto  heaven,  and 
swnre  by  him  thrt 
liveth  forever,  that 
it  thaUbe  for  a  time, 
times,  and  a  half: 
and  when  he  shall 
have  accomplished 
to  scatter  the  pow- 
er of  the  holy  peo- 
ple, all  these  things 
eboll  be  finished, 


10  Many  shall  be 
purifiid,  and  made 
whiti.-,  and  iritid  ; 
but  Ihuwicked  shall 

iikedly  :  nnd 
none  of  the  Milked 
shull  uni'.erstand  ; 
but  the  wise  shall 
underEt'ind. 

11  And  from  the 
time  that  the  daily 
Mcrirfcc  shall  Le 
taken  away,  and 
the  abomination 
that  moketh  deso- 
late set  up.  there 
shall  be  a  thousand 
two  hundred  and 
ninety  days. 

12  blessed  ix  he 
that  waiteth.  and 
Cometh  to  the  thou- 
sand three  hundred 
and  five  and  thirty 
days. 


4-8  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 

the  Lurd  had  given  to  their  fathers,  servants  to  it.  Though  now  again  the  niincd  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem and  the  cities  of  Judah  were  restored,  and  the  temjjle  also  was  rebuilt,  and  the  offering 
up  of  sacritice  renewed,  yet  the  glory  of  the  Lord  did  not  again  enter  into  the  new  temple, 
■which  was  also  without  the  ark  of  the  covenant  and  the  mercy-scat,  so  as  to  hallow  it  as  the 
place  of  His  gracious  presence  among  His  people.  The  temple  worshi])  among  the  Jews  after 
the  captivity  was  without  its  soul,  the  real  presence  of  the  Lord  in  the  sanctuary ;  the  high 
priest  could  no  longer  go  before  God's  throne  of  grace  in  the  holy  of  holies  to  sprinkle  the 
atoning  blood  of  saciifice  toward  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  and  to  accomjilish  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  the  congregation  with  their  God,  and  could  no  longer  find  out,  Ity  means  of  the  Urim 
and  Thumim,  the  will  of  the  Lord.  When  Nehcniiah  had  finished  the  restoration  of  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem,  jjrophecy  ceased,  the  revelations  of  the  Old  Covenant  came  to  a  final  end,  and 
the  period  of  expectation  (duiing  which  no  propliecy  was  given)  of  the  promised  Deliverer,  of 

the  seed  of  David,  began If  the  prophets  before  the  captivity,  therefore,  connect 

the  deliverance  of  Israel  from  Babylon,  and  their  return  to  Canaan,  immediately  with  the  set- 
ting up  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  its  glorj',  without  giving  any  indication  that  between  the 
end  of  the  Baljylonian  exile  and  the  appearance  of  the  Messiah  a  long  period  would  inter- 
vene, this  uniting  together  of  the  two  events  is  not  to  be  explained  only  from  the  perspective 
and  apotelesmatic  character  of  the  prophecy,  but  has  its  foundation  in  the  very  nature  of  the 
thing  itself.  The  jjrophetic  jjerspective,  by  virtue  of  wliich  the  inward  eye  of  the  seer  beholds 
only  the  elevated  summits  of  historical  events  as  they  unfold  themselves,  and  not  the  valleys 
of  the  common  incidents  of  histoi-y  which  lie  between  these  heights,  is  indeed  peculiar  to 
projihecy  in  general,  and  accounts  for  the  circumstance  that  the  jnophecies  as  a  rule  give  no 
fixed  dates,  and  apostelesmatically  bind  together  the  points  of  history  which  ojjcn  the  way  to 
the  end  with  the  end  itself.  But  this  formal  jjeculiarity  of  prophetic  contemplation  we  must 
not  extend  to  the  prejudice  of  the  actual  truth  of  the  prophecies.  The  fact  of  the  uniting 
together  of  the  future  glory  of  the  kingdom  of  God  under  the  Messiah  with  the  deliverance 
of  Israel  fi'om  exile,  has  perfect  historical  veracity.  The  banishment  of  the  covenant  people 
from  the  land  of  the  Lord,  and  their  subjection  to  the  heathen,  was  not  only  the  last  of  those 
judgments  which  God  threatened  against  His  degenerate  people,  but  it  also  continues  till  the 
pei-verse  rebels  are  exterminated,  and  the  penitents  are  turned  with  sincere  hearts  to  God  the 
Lord  and  are  saved  through  Christ.  Consequently  the  exile  was  for  Israel  the  last  sjjace  for 
repentance  which  God  in  His  faithfulness  to  His  covenant  granted  to  them.  Whoever  is  not 
brought  by  this  severe  chastisement  to  rei)entance  and  reformation,  but  remains  opposed  to 
the  gracious  will  of  God,  on  him  falls  the  judgment  of  death  :  and  only  they  who  turn  them- 
selves to  the  Lord,  their  God  and  Saviour,  will  be  saved,  gathered  from  among  the  heathen, 
brought  in  within  the  bonds  of  the  covenant  of  grace  through  Christ,  aud  become  partakers 
of  the  promised  riches  of  grace  in  His  kingdom."] 

[Note  3. — As  a  conspectus  of  Daniel's  entire  series  of  projjhecies  respecting  the  world-king- 
doms, showing  their  complete  harmony  and  mutual  illustration,  as  well  as  their  exact  accord- 
ance with  history,  we  insert  (on  pages  44-47)  a  table  of  all  the  passages,  taken  from  M'Clin- 
tock  and  Strong's  Cyclopadia,  s.  v.  Daniel.] 

[Note  4. — Dr.  Cowles,  in  his  Commentary  on  Daniel  (N.  Y.  1871),  devotes  an  Excursus 
(pp.  4.59  sq.)  to  the  consideration  of  that  theory,  generally  called  the  "  year-for-a-day  "  view, 
which  results  in  applying  the  prophecy  of  the  fourth  kingdom  of  Rome,  and  especially  the 
Papacy.  His  arguments  are  perfectly  conclusive  to  candid  minds.  As  the  work  is  easily 
acce.ssible  we  forl^ear  to  quote  or  abridge  his  remarks.  See  further  the  exegetical  observations 
on  the  passages  where  the  dates  are  given.] 

§  11.  The  Alexandbiak  Version  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  its  Apocrtphal  addi- 
tions. 

The  Alexandrian  translation  of  this  book  was,  during  a  long  time,  supposed  to  be  no  more 
in  existence,  because  the  church,  as  far  back  as  the  time  of  EusebiMs  of  Csesarea  and  Pamphy- 
lius,  had  adopted  the  version  of  the  Jewish  proselyte  Theodotian,  which  was  considerably 
more  exact  and  free  from  errors.*  The  genuine  Se])tuagint  text  of  Daniel  was  not  published 
iintil  1773,  when  Simon  de  Magistris,  a  Romish  priest  of  the  oratory,  published  it  from  a 
Codex  Chiaianus.  The  editions  by  J.  D.  Michaelis  (1773-4)  and  Segaar  (1775)  served  to 
farther  introduce  and  midtiply  this  version.  H.  A.  Hahn  finally  published  a  truly  crirical 
edition  (1845),  for  which  he  had  availed  himself  of  a  Syriac-Hexaplarian  version  published 
in  1788  by  Cajetan  BugatI,  from  a  Codex  Ambrosianus.     This  hexapla  offers  a  Septuagint 

•  Of.  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Dan.  It.,  16  ;  "  Septuagtnta  hoc  omnia  nescio  qna  ratiotie  pre^terierunt.  Undejndicio  mxigii- 
Irorum  Enle^iit  eililio  eorum  in  hoc  volumine  npudiata  est  el  Thtodotiontt  cutgo  legttur,  qua:  ec  Hebrxo  et  cnteri* 
trantiutvribus  aongruitj'^ 


ALESANDKIAN  VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL.  40 

text  corrected  after  Theodotian,  as  Origen  had  prepared  it  for  his  Si'xnpla,  while  the  text  edited 
after  the  Cod.  Chisianus  represents  the  genuine  and  unadulterated  language  of  the  Alexan- 
drian version,  as  it  had  stood  in  Origen's  Tetrapla  beside  the  unchanged  text  of  Tlieodotian 
(cf.  Delitzsch,  p.  286). 

The  Alexandrian  version  of  this  book  probably  originated  before,  or  at  any  rate  about,  tlie 
middle  of  the  second  century  before  Christ,  and  therefore  at  the  time  in  which  the  opposing 
criticism  finds  the  Hebrew  original  to  have  been  written  (cf.  §  6,  note  3).  The  numerous 
departures  fiom  the  original  which  this  version  presents,  and  which  consist  in  the  change  of 
■words  and  phrases  {e.g.  I.  3,  11,  16;  II.  8,  11,  28;  VIL  6,  8,  etc.),  in  part  of  abbreviations 
and  omissions  {e.g.  III.  31  et  seq. ;  IV.  2-6  ;  V.  17-25 ;  26-38),  and  finally,  also  in  extensions 
of  the  text  {e.g.  FV.  34  ;  VI.  20,  22-29),  are  by  many  critics  traced  to  a  Hebrew  or  Chaldee 
text  diverse  from  the  original,  upon  which  this  version  is  based  {e.g.  Michaelis,  Bertholdt, 
Eichhorn).  But  they  owe  their  existence,  more  probably,  to  the  labors  of  the  translator,  since 
they  are  merely  interpretations  or  paraplu'ases,  designed  to  clear  uj)  the  text,  to  indicate  the 
connection,  or  to  simplify  or  intensify  the  wonderful  (cf.  Haveniick,  Kommentar,  p.  xlvii  et 
seq.  ;  De  Wette,  Einl,  §  258  ;  Keil,  §  137). 

Nor  do  the  longer  interpolations  inserted  into  the  book  of  Daniel,  in  both  tlie  Alexandrian 
and  Theodotian's  versions,  and  generally  bearing  the  name  of  (ipocryphul  additions  to  Daniel, 
contain  any  feature  that  could  compel  the  assumj^tion  of  a  Hebrew  or  Chaldee  original  on 
which  they  are  based.  Their  lingual  features  testify  rather  to  an  original  composition  in  the 
Greek  (particularly  the  paronomasias  or  plays  on  Greek  words,  which  were  remarked  by  Por- 
phyry,— sucli  as  axlfoi,  axintiiL-nfilvoi,  njiinii,  whicli  can  scarcely  be  traced  back  to  Hebrew  paro- 
nomasias that  were  copied  by  the  translator  *),  which  is  therefore  accepted  by  Micliaelis,  De 
Wette,  Bleek,  Hiivernick,  etc.,  while  other  critics  contend  that  these  fragments  were  wholly, 
or  in  part,  translated  from  a  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  original.  (The  latter  include  not  merely 
Roman  Catholics,  as  Dereser,  Welte,  Haneberg,  Reusch,  but  also  Protestants,  among  whom  are 
Bertholdt,  Eichhorn,  DeKtzsch  [De  Jlahacuci  prophetw  vita  atque  a:tate,  1844,  p.  52  et  seq.], 
Fritzschc  [Exeget.  Handhuch  zu  den  Apol-ryphen,  I.  Ill  et  seq.],  Zlindel,  etc.)  This  hypothesis 
of  a  Shemitic  original  may  l)e  justified,  at  most,  with  regard  to  two  of  these  additions  (the 
prayer  of  Azariah,  and  the  song  of  the  three  children),  but  not  with  reference  to  the  two  that 
remain.  These  latter  fragments  (the  history  of  "  Susanna  and  Daniel,"  and  that  of  "  Bl'1  and 
the  dragon  ")  bear  a  decidedly  legendary  character,  being  designed  to  glorify  Daniel,  and 
involving  many  improbabilities,  and  even  impossibilities.  They  are  therefore  regarded,  and 
with  justice,  as  being  of  still  later  origin  than  the  other  component  parts  of  the  Greek  Daniel. 
In  the  Alexandrian  version  they  compose  the  closing  sections  of  the  book  (chapters  xiii.  and 
xiv.,  by  the  modem  arrangement  of  chapters),  but  are  introduced  vrith  formulas  {e.g.  chap, 
xiv.,  or  Bel  and  the  dragon,  with  the  puzzling  superscription:  «'«  t^;  Trpoc^jjTfioj  'AuGaKoifi  vioi: 
'Iijuoi  ex  tr)i  tpvXrjs  Afiit),  the  peculiarity  of  which  is  of  itself  sufficient  to  indicate  their  origin 
subsequently  to  the  time  of  Daniel,  whether  an  otherwise  unknown  prophet  jjseudo-Habakkuk 
be  regarded  as  their  author,  or  their  origin  be  ascribed  to  one  or  several  Jewish  or  Hellenistic 
writers.  In  Theodotian's  translation  these  additions  are  organically  incorporated  with  tlie 
Book  of  Daniel,  Susanna  being  placed  before  Chap.  i.  as  belonging  to  the  history  of  the 
prophet's  youth — the  '•  prayer  of  Azariah  "  and  the  "  song  of  the  three  children  "  being 
inserted  between  vs.  23  and  24  of  chap.  iii.  (similar  to  theii'  position  in  the  Sept.),  while  only 
"  Bel  and  the  dragon  "  is  consigned  to  the  end  of  the  book  after  chap.  xii. 

The  question  relating  to  the  time  and  place  in  which  these  apocryphal  fragments  were  com- 
posed cannot  be  solved,  and  we  can  only  venture  the  supposition  that  the  four  emanated  from 
different  authors.  This  appears  in  the  case  of  tlie  "  prayer  of  Azariah  "  and  the  "  song  of 
the  three  children"  (chap.  III.  24-45  and  51-90),  from  the  circumstance,  that  in  the  former 
(v.  38)  the  temple  is  represented  as  destroyed  and  its  services  as  havmg  ceased,  while  the  othei 

•  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Dan.  Praph. :  *'  Sed  el  hoc  uo/i^e  (tebemu-i,  inter  ceetera  Porpftyriuni  de  Danielis  libra  nobis  oftfi- 
cere,  idt-ircn  ilium  (ippni'ere  eonjlrtnm,  nee  haberi  apitd  Jfebr<ros.  sed  Grtfct  sermnnis  esse  comnientum  :  quia  in  Sitwm 
nie  fabuUl  contiueatiir,  dicenie  Itnniete  adpresbi/teros,  airh  tou  tT\ivov  (T\i<TaL,  KaX  aTro  toO  ;7pti'ou  jrpitrat.  qnam  et:inioU> 
ffiam  inagis  Gvceco  sermoni  convenire  quain  Jfebi'tro,  cni  et  Eusebius  et  Apollinaris  pari  sententia  responderunt : 
SusanntT  BeUsqne,  et  Draconis  fabulasjion  contineri  tn  Sebraico,  sed  partem  esse  prophetice  Habacuc  Jllii  i/e«M,"  etc 

I 


5(>  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PEOPHET  DANIEL. 

fragment  presumes  the  existence  of  botlx  these  institutions  (vs.  54,  84  et  seq.).  Of  the  two 
remaining  additions,  that  relating  to  Susanna  (possiljly  containing  a  grain  of  historical  truth 
belonging  to  the  age  of  the  canonical  book  of  Daniel)  seems  to  have  been  composed  at  an 
early  day,  and  without  any  reference  to  the  canonical  Daniel ;  while  "  Bel  and  the  dragon,'' 
or  the  '■  Prophecy  of  Habakkuk,  the  son  of  Jesus,  of  the  tribe  of  Le^^,"  appears  to  have  been 
written,  with  special  reference  to  Dan.  vii.,  by  a  Palestinian  author  of  a  much  later  time.  All 
of  these  apocryphal  appendages  to  the  questions  relating  to  Daniel  furnish  a  very  important 
testimony  in  attestation  of  the  superior  historical  rank  and  genuine  prophetical  character  of 
the  canonical  Daniel,  inasmuch  as  their  artificial  stamp  and  legendary  tone  present  a  contrast 
to  the  far  more  sober  and  credible  contents  of  that  book,  analogous  to  the  familiar  contrast 
bet\veen  the  apocryi^hal  and  the  canonical  Gospels,  which  serves  so  strongly  to  endorse  the 
credibility  of  tlie  latter.  These  remarks  will  also  apply  to  the  contrast  between  Daniel  and 
the  pseudonymous  apocalyj)ses  of  the  last  Jewish,  or  pre-Christian  age,  e.g.  tlie  "  Sibylline 
Oracles,"  Enoch,  and  the  "Fourth  Book  of  Esdras,"  whose  partial  dependence  on  our  book 
has  already  lieen  considered  (§  6,  especially  note  3),  and  which  are  unquestionably  the  earlier 
or  later  products  of  an  apocalyptic  and  simulated  authorship,  like  that  of  the  unknown  origi- 
nators of  the  additions  to  our  book. 

Note. — In  relation  to  the  apologetic  importance  of  the  ajjocryjAal  supplements  to  chap, 
iii.  13  and  14  in  the  Greek  Daniel,  compare  Delitzsch.  p.  186:  "How  favorable  is  the  testi- 
mony for  the  historical  and  prophetical  character  of  the  canonical  book,  which  results  from 
its  contrast  with  these  apocryphal  legends  1  " — and  also  Ziiudel,  p.  187:  "  These  apocryphal 
additions  to  Daniel  therefore,  did  not  all  originate  at  the  same  time,  or  in  the  same  place  : 
Imt  one  appeared  on  Grecian. (?)  soil,  another  on  Palestinian,  and  a  third  perhaps  on  Babylo- 
nian. Tlicy  were  translated  before  they  were  received  hy  the  Septuagint  (witht)ut  exception  ? 
— see  above)  ;  and  prior  to  their  reception,  they  had  been  partially  gathered,  and  ascribed  to 
a  s])uriuus  Habakkuk.  ...  If  Daniel,  tlierefore,  was  not  composed  until  B.  C.  168,  how 
could  the  ti-anslation  in  question,  together  with  these  additions,  have  existed  as  early  as  B.  C. 
130  '.  Even  though  an  unusually  rapid  formation  of  legends  l)e  assumed,  from  the  oldest, 
relating  to  Susanna,  to  the  latest  ail's otj  ruiv  rijiiii/  7tui.huv,  how  is  it  possible  to  conceive  the  con- 
trast between  the  original  work  and  the  oldest  forgery,  as  developed  within  the  limits  of  a 
single  generation  I  And  from  tlie  earliest  forgery  again,  down  to  the  latest,  would  not  a  con- 
siderable contrast  have  arisen  here,  e.g.  between  tlie  «po'ifv;^i}  and  the  aiVfoij  ?  .  .  .  And 
beyond  this,  their  being  translated  and  collected !  All  these  considerations  compel  ua  to 
assume  a  jieriod,  covering  many  gcneratkiu.'i,  between  the  origin  of  the  bool- of  Daniel  and  its 
Alexandrian  version.''^ — See  ibid.,  p.  134  et  seq.,  and  especially  p.  137,  on  the  relation  of  the 
Jewish  aporahjpses  of  the  ])re-Christian  period  to  Daniel :  "  A  pre-Christian,  or,  upon  the 
whole,  a  jjrogressive  development,  cannot  be  asserted  in  connection  with  these  apocalypses ; 
for,  with  the  exception  of  the  Sibyllines,  none  of  them  was  sufficiently  important  to  give  rise 
to  imitations.  They  did  not  spring  from  each  other,  but  are  co-ordinate,  and  the  only  con- 
nection among  themselves  consists  in  their  imitating  the  earlier  prophets,  and  in  their  tendency 
to  describe  the  facts  of  history  in  an  ajjocalyptie  manner.  But  on  the  other  hand,  nearly  all  of 
them  contain  imitations  of  Daniel.  The  "  Book  of  Enoch  "  treats  of  the  interjjretation  of  the 
number  seventy  in  his  seventy  regents  ;  Esdras's  eagle  with  wings  and  feathers  is  evidently  the 
fourth  [?  first]  beast  of  Daniel;  and  the  person  who  incessantly  inquires  why  the  covenant 
peojjle  is  afllicted,  is  merely  a  copy  of  Daniel  while  mourning  liecause  of  tlie  delay  in  the  ful- 
filment of  projjhecy  (chap.  ix.  and  x.).  The  numbers  of  Daniel  in  chap.  viii.  are  almost  com- 
pletely restoied  in  the  Ascensio  Jesajoe,  which  also  paints  the  coming  of  the  Lord  with  Daniel's 
colors,"  etc. 

The  apocryphal  additions  to  Daniel  are  found  also  in  the  ancient  Coptic  version,  which  is 
not  -n-ithout  importance  for  textual  criticism.  They  have  been  published  by  Henry  Tattam, 
in  vol.  II.,  p.  270  ss.  of  his  Prvplieta  majores  in  lingua  yEgyptiucm  dialecto  Memphitica  s. 
Co2>tica  (Oxon,  1852). 

§  12.  Theological  and  Homiletical  Literatitbe  on  Daniei. 

I.  Ancient  Period. — 1.  Christian  expositors.  (1.)  Church  fathers  :  Hippolyti  Commenlar. 
in  Danielis  et  Kehiiehadnezaris  visionum  solutio7ies  (capp.  7-12),  editus  e  cod.  Chisiano  in  Dan- 
idem  sec.  LXX.  interpretes,  Roma;,  1772  (see  also  the  fragment  in  Greek  of  a  commentary  on 
Daniel  in  the  0pp.  nippolyti.  cd.  J.  A.  Fabricius.  Hamb.,  1716).  EjAnTmi  Syri  Cominenlar. 
in  Dan.,  in  his  0pp.  Gr.  et  Syr,  ed.  Assemaui,  Rom.,  1740  ct  seq.,  torn.  II.,  p.  203  et  sen.     Hiero- 


THEOLOGICAL  AXD  HOMILETICAL  LITERATURE  OF  DANIEL.  Oi 

nymi  ExpLiruitio  in  Danulem  prophetam,  in  his  Opp.  ed  Vallars.,  Vanet.,  1768,  torn,  v.,  p.  XL 
rheodoreti  Commentar.  in  visianes  Danulia  propheta  [Tno/ivr^fia  tij  raj  opuotij  roii  npop/jroL' 
SavtTj-K),  in  his  Opp.  ed.  Schulze,  Hal.,  1768  et  seq.,  t.  IL,  p.  II.,  p.  1063  ct  seq.*  Polycluouii  (a 
Drother  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia)  Commentarius  in  Danielem,  in  A.  Mai,  Nova  Collect,  I.  B, 
p.  155.  [Chrysostomi  Interpretatio  in  Danielem,  in  liis  Opp.  vi.  228  et  seq.]  (2.)  During  the 
middle  ages:  3 oa.c\\\m  Ej^oaitio  in  iJaHteZ.,  Venet.,  1519.  Thomas  Aquinas,  Comm.  in  Dan- 
iel., separ.  ed.  Paris,  1640.  [Rupertus  Tuitiensis,  In  Danielem,  liber  i.  (in  his  Opp.  i.,  520  et 
seq.)  Albertus  Magnus,  Comment,  in  Danielem  (in  his  Opp.,  p.  8  et  seq.)]  2.  Jewish  expositors 
(Rabbins) :  R.  Saadia  Hag-Gaon  (t  924),  in  the  RabUn.  Bibles  by  Bomberg  (Venet.,  1526  et 
seq.)  and  Buxtorf  (Basil,  1618).  Rashi  {i.e.  R.  Shelomoh  ben-Jizchak,  f  1105),  ihid.,  and  also 
in  J.  F.  Breithaupt's  Commentt.  It.  S.  Jarchi  in  Propfih.,  Joh,  et  Psahnos  in  Lat.  vert.,  Goth. 
1713.  Ibn-Ezra  (f  1167),  in  the  Rahhiii.  Bibles.  Abarbanel  (t  1508),  nj'v:;-;  i?-;??;  {i.e.  "  wells 
of  salvation,"  Isa.  xii.  3),  Neap.,  1497;  also  Arasterd.,  1617,  4.  R.  Joseph  Teitzack  (about 
1500),  B"'"?t;D  03^  (pauis  absconditus,  Prov.  ix.  17 — a  commentai^  on  Daniel  and  the  5  Megil- 
loth),  Venet.,  1608,  4.  R.  Mosheh  Alshech  (about  1560),  lIT^'n  r;-^2n  (Cant.  U.,  1),  Zaphat, 
1508  ;  Venet.,  1592.  R.  Shamuel  b.- Jeh.  Valeri  (16th  cent.l,  ns:bb  liin  (\isio  temporis  statuti), 
Venet.,  1586.  R.  Joseph  ben-D.  David  ben-J.  Jachim  (usually  Jacchiades,  t  1559),  Paraphra- 
»is  in  Dan.  proph.,  Heb.  et  Lat.,  ed  Const.  L'Erapereur,  Amstel.,  1633,  4to  ;  [new  ed.,  by  Philipp- 
son,  Dessau,  1808,  4to  and  8vo.  Jud.  Low  Jeitteles,  a  Heb.  Commentary  on  Dan.,  Ezra  and 
Neb.,  Vienna,  1835,  8vo.] 

n.  Modern  period.  1.  Protestant  expositors,  (a)  lu  the  16th  century:  IjUiher,  Der  Prophet 
Daniel  deutsch,  Wittenb.,  1530,  4  (dedicated  to  duke  John  Fred.)  ;  Vorrede  Sber  den  Proph. 
Daniel,  nebst  Auslegung  des  XI.  und  XII.  Kap.,  Wittenb.,  1546,  4;  Disputation  icier  den  Ort 
Dan.  iv.  34 ; — the  three  works  collected  under  the  title  Auslegung  des  Proph.  Daniel,  in  vol. 
vi.  of  Walch's  ed.  Melancthon,  Comment,  in  Daniel,  proph.,  Vitemb.,  1543,  8  (in  his  Opip.,  torn. 
[I.,  p.  410)  ;  [^Exposition  of  Daniel,  gathered  out  of  P.  Melancthon,  by  G.  Joy,  Geneva,  1545, 
lOmo,  Lond.,  1550,  8vo] ;  in  German,  by  Just.  Jonas,  1546.  Joh.  Draconitis  Cummeiit.  in 
Daniel,  ex  Ebrao  versum,  cum  oratione  in  Danielem,  Marburg,  1544,  8.  Victorin.  Sti'igel, 
Danielis  prop)hetm  concio,  ad  Ebraicam  et  Chaldaicam  tieritatem  recognita  et  argumentis  atque 
icholiis  illustrata.  Lips.,  1505,  1571.  Joh.  Wigand,  Explicatio  brevis  in  Danielem,  Jen.,  1571. 
Nik.  Selnekker,  ErH.  des  Proph.  Danielund  der  Offenbarung  Johannis,  Jen.,  1567,  160S.  Phil. 
Heilbrunner,  Danielis  piroph.  naticinia  in  locos  communes  theologicos  digesta  et  qiutstionibus 
methodice  illustrata,  Lauing.,  1587.  J.  Qicolampadius,  In  Danielem  II.  II.,  omnigena  et  ubstru- 
riore  cum  Ebrceorum  turn  Grcecorum  seriptorum  doctrinarej'crti,  Basil.,  1530,  1543,  and  often, 
L  Calvin,  Pradectiones  in  Danielem,  a  Joa.  BudjEo  et  Car.  Jonvillaeo  coUectoe,  Genev.,  1563, 
1576,  and  often  (also  in  his  Opp.,  torn,  v.,  Amstel.,  1667  [Commentary  on  Daniel,  tr.  by  T. 
Myrcs,  M.A.,  Edinb.,  1852,  3  vols.  8vo.]).  Fr.  Junius,  Erpositio  proph.  Danielis,  a  Jo.  Gru- 
tero  excepta,  Heidelb.,  1593;  Goncv.,  1594.  Rob.  Kollock,  Comin.  in  libr.  Dan.  prnphetci', 
Edinb.,  1591 ;  Basil,  1594  ;  Gen.,  1598.  Hugh  Broughtim,  Danielis  visiones  Chahhiiae  et 
EbrcEce,  ex  originali  translatte  et  illustratce,  London,  1596  (Engl.  ed.  [also  in  Worl's,  p.  164 
et  seq.]),  Basil.,  1599  (Lat.  ed.  J.  Boreel).  A  Polanus  a  Polansdorf,  In  Danielem  prophetam, 
visionum  amplitudine  difficillimum,  vaticiuiorum  majestate  augustissimum,  commentarius,  in  quo 
logica  analysi  et  theologica  e/c^easi,  tradita  in  publicis  prcelectionibis  in  vetusta  Basileensi  acade- 
mia,  totius  libri,  ad  hoc  avum  calamitosum  saluberrimi,  genuinus  sensus  et  multiplex  usus  osteif 
diiur,  Basil.,  1599,  1608. 

(b).  In  the  17th  century:  S.  Gesner,  Daniel  proplieta  disputationihus  XII.,  et  prefationt 
ehronologica  hreviter  explicatus,  Vitemljerg.,  1601,  1607,  and  often.  Polyc.  Leyser,  Commenta- 
rius in  Dan.  cap.  I.-VL,  Francof.  et  Darmst.,  1609  et  seq.f  J.  C.  Rhumelius,  Libei-  Danielit 
paraphrasi  recensitus,  Norimb.,  1616.     Mart.  Geier,  Prcelectlones  academics  in  Danielem  proph., 

•  The  fragments  of  several  other  patristical  expositors  of  Daniel,  e.ff.  Ammonias,  Polj-chronius,  Apolllnaris,  Eudoxius, 
may  be  found  in  the  commentary  of  H.  Broughton,  mentioned  below  (Dantelts  vMona  Cliald.  et  Bibr.,  Basil.,  15a9),  is 
connection  with  the  expositions  of  Hippolytus  and  others. 

+  This  worlv  of  Leyser's  has  been  published  in  six  ports  under  various  titles :  (1)  Scholia  Babyiuuica,  h.  e.  eccltitiastian 
rvmmentationes  in  cap.  I.  Danielis.  Francof.,  1609 ;  (2)  Colossus  Bahylonicus  qiialuor  mundi  monarchias  reprasentant, 
§.  ecct.  expo6itio  cap.  If.  Danielis,  Darmst.,  1609 ;  (3)  Foi'itax  Babylonica,  sincere  retigionis  coft/essoris  probans,  «.  Mel, 


52  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DaNIEL. 

Lips.,  1667  and  often.  Abrah.  Calov,  Annotata  Anti-Grotiana in  Jeremiam  et  Daniele  n proph., 
Vitemb.,  1664.  A.  Varenius,  Collegium  canonicum  quatuor  novissimoriim  V.  Ti.  prophetarum, 
Danielis,  Haggmi,  Zacharm,  Mahichice,  Rostochii,  1667.  G.  Meissner,  Der  Prophet  Daniel, 
sowoJd  gescheheiie  Dinge  ausredend,  als  hanftige  weissagend,  durch  kurze  Anmerhiingen  erldutert  ; 
■with  a  preface  by  J.  Fr.  Mayer,  Hamburg,  1695,  13.  J.  H.  Alsted,  Trifolium  propheticwn, 
i.e.  Cant.  Canticor.  Salom.,  prophetia  Danielis,  Apocalypsis  Joannis,  sic  explicantur,  ut  series 
textM  et  temporis  prophetici,  e  regione  posita,  lucem  menti  et  consolationem  cordi  ingcrant,  Her- 
born,  1640.  Constantin  L'Empereur  (Professor  controversiarum  Judaicarum  at  Leyden, 
t  1648),  Paraphrasis  Jos.  Jachiadm  in  Danielem  cum  versione  et  annotationihus,  Amstcl.,  1633 
(see  supra  I.,  2).  Tliom.  Parker,  Eipositio  msionum  et  prophetiarum  Danielis,  Lond.,  1646. 
J.  Cocceius,  Comment,  in  Danielem,  Lugd.  Bat.,  1666.  H.  Wingendorf,  Prophetia  Danielis 
paraphrasi  reddita  et  cum  prof anm  historim  momimentis  collata,  Lugd.  Bat.,  1674.  J.  H.  Jung- 
mann,  Propheta  Daniel  novo  modo  et  hactenus  inaudito  reseratus,  etc.,  etc.,  Casselis,  1681. 
Baltli.  Bekker,  Uitlegginge  van  den  Propli£t  Daniel,  Amsterd.,  1688,  1698. 

(c).  In  tlie  18tli  century:  J.  Musaius,  Sclwlm  propheticas  contintLatce,  ex  pralectionihus  in 
prophetas  Danielem,  Micham,  et  Joelem  collects,  ed.  J.  E.  de  Scliulenberg,  Quedlinb.,  1719. 
Chr.  Bened.  Michaelis,  Adnotationes  j>TiHologico-exegetiaE  in  Danielem,  Hal.,  1720  (also  in  Vol. 
in.  of  the  Annotait.  uberioi'es  in  Hagiogr.).  J.  W.  Petersen,  Sinn  des  Oeistes  in  dem  Propheten 
Daniel,  Frankfort  a.  M.,  1720.  J.  Koch,  Entsiegelter  Daniel,  d.  i.  richtige  AvJlOsung  der  siiinmt- 
lichen  Weissagungen  Daniels,  nach  ihrem  wahren  Inhalt,  unzertrennl.  Verhindung,  einhelligen 
Ahsicht,  vnd  genauen,  sogar  anf  Jalire  und  Tage  mit  der  Chronologie  zutreffenden  Zeitrechnung 
aiif  den  Mcssiam,  Lemgo,  1740.  M.  Fr.  Roos,  Auslegung  der  Weissagungen  Daniels,  die  in 
die  Zeit  des  Neuen  Testaments  hineinreichen,  nebst  ihrer  Vergleichung  mit  der  Offenh.  Joh.  naeh 
der  BengeVschen  Erklarung  derselben,  Leips.,  1771  [in  English,  by  G.  Henderson,  Edinb., 
1811,  8vo.].  J.  Chr.  Harenberg,  Aiifklarung  des  Buclies  Daniel  aus  der  Orundsprache,  der 
Geschichte  und  iibrigen  rechten  Hiilfsmitteln,  zum  richtigen  Verstand  der  Sdtze,  zur  Befestiguny 
der  Wahrheit,  und  zur  Erlauung  durch  die  lieligion,  Blankenburg  and  Quedlinburg,  1773,  2 
parts.  Chr.  S.  Beuj.  Zeise,  Ueherselzung  und  Erlddrung  des  Buches  Daniel,  Dresden,  1777. 
J.  D.  Liiderwald,  Die  seeks  ersten  Kapitel  Daniels,  nach  historischen  Griinden  gepriift  und 
herichtigt,  Helmstadt,  1787.  J.  C.  Volborth,  Daniel  avfs  neiie  aus  dem  Hebrilish-Chaldaischen 
iibersetzt,  und  mit  hurzen  Anmerlcungen  filr  unstudirte  Leser  und  Nichttheologen  begleitet,  Han- 
over, 1788.  C.  G.  Thube,  Das  Buch  des  Propheten  Daniel,  neu  iibersetzt  und  erlclart,  Schwerin 
and  VVismar,  1797.  Wm.  Lowth,  Commentary  upon  tJie  prophecy  of  Daniel  and  the  twelve 
Minor  prophets,  Lond.,  1726,  2  vols.  Isaac  Newton,  Observations  upon  the  j/ruphecies  of  Daniel 
and  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  Lond.,  1738,  2  vols,  (a  posthumous  work,  published  six  years 
after  the  death  of  the  author;  afterwards  published  in  Latin  by  W.  Siidemann,  Amstel.,  1737, 
and  in  German,  with  notes,  by  C.  F.  Grossmann,  Leips.,  1765.— Cf.  supra  §  5.).  H.  Venema, 
Dissertationes  ad  vaticinia  Danielis  emblematica,  cap.  II.,  VII.  et  VIII.  de  quatuor  orientis  7-egnis, 
ordine  sibi  successuris  et  quinto  Messi<B ;  in  quibus  ilia  nmd  vid  demoustraiitur  et  illustrantur, 
aliisque  prophelis  lux  affunditur,  Leovard.,  1745.  The  same.  Comment,  in  Dan.  cap.  XI.  4-XII. 
3,  ibid.,  1 752.  R.  Amner,  An  essay  towards  an  interpretation  of  the  prophecies  of  Daniel,  Lond., 
1776  ;  also  in  German,  Versuch  iiber  die  sdmmtliehen  Weissagungen  Daniels,  nebst  Anmerlcungen 
liber  die  beriihintesten  Erhldrer  derselben,  von  Rich.  Amner,  Halle,  1779.  T.  Wintle,  Daniel, 
An  improved  version  attempted,  with  a  preliminary  dissertation  and  notes,  critical,  historical,  and 
explanatory,  Lond.,  1792. 

(d;.  In  the  19th  century  :  Leonh.  Bertholdt,  Daniel  aiis  dem  Hehrdish-Aramdisclten  neu 
ubersetzt  und  erkldrt,  mit  einer  vollstdndigen  Einleitung  und  einigen  historischen  u.  exegetischen 
ExkuTsen,  2  parts,  Erlangen,  1806,  1808.  G.  F.  Griesinger,  Neue  Ansichi  der  Aufsdtze  im  Buch 
Daniel,  Stuttg.  and  Tiiljingen,  1815.  E.  F.  C.  'Ro&iiTimxi\l&:  Danielem  Lat.  vertit  et  annotation 
perpetua  illustravit  (part  X.  of  the  Scholia  in  V.  T.),  Lips.,  1832.  H.  A.  Ch.  Hiivernick, 
B'omrnentar  iiber  das  Buch  Daniel,  Hamb.,  1832.     Cas.  v.  Lengerke,  Das  Buch  Daniel,  Kon- 

eyp.  cop.  Iff.  Dan.,  Francof. ,  161U  ;  (4)  Cedrua  Babylonica,  potenten  docentt  humtlitatem  et  deteatuns  snperoiam,  9.  eccl 
txp.  call.  f^'.  />««.,  Francof..  1610  ;  (5)  Epuluin  Babyloiilciim,  in  quo  canate  interitus  tmperlorum  et  regnoruin  spectanda 
5ft  ontloH  proponnnlur,  a.  eccl.  exp.  cap.  V.  Dan..  Darmst.,  IfitO;  (ti)  Aula  Perslca,  patendena  pie-tale.ni  ab  invidta  aulica 
premi,  aed  iiequaquam opprtmi,  a.  eccl.  exp.  cap,  Vf,  Dan.,  Darmst.,  1610. 


THEOLOGICAG  AND  HOMILETICAL  LITERATURE  OF  DANIEL.  53 

igsb.,  1835.  F.  J.  V.  D.  Maurer,  Commentar.  gramm.  ci'it.  in  V.  T..  vol.  II,  fasc.  1  (Ezcch. 
et  Dan.),  1836.  F.  Hitzig,  Kurzgefasates  exeget.  Handhuch  zum  A.  T.  ;  lOtb  pamphlet.  Dot 
Bueh  Daniel,  Leips.,  1850.  C.  A.  Auberlen,  Der  Prophet  Daniel  und  die  Offenharung  Johannii, 
in  ihrem  gegenseitigen  Verhdltniss  hetrachtet  und  in  ihren  Hauptstellen  erldutert,  Basle,  1854, 
1857  [in  English,  by  Rev.  A.  Sophir,  Edinb.,  1856,  8vo.].  J.  M.  Gartner,  Erkldi-ung  de* 
Pi'vpheten  Daniel  und  der  Uffenharung  Johannis,  sowie  der  Weissagnng  von  liesekieVs  Gog,  in 
genauer  Uehereinstimmung  mit  den  Haxijiterscheinungen  der  Welt-  und  KircJiengeschichte  seit  der 
Oriindung  des  hahylonischen  Weltreichs,  600  v.  C'hr.,  his  aiif  unsere  Zeit  und  his  zur  Wiederlcunft 
Christi  um  das  Ende  unserea  Jahrhunderts ;  6  numbers,  Stuttgart,  1863  et  seq.  Rud.  Kian- 
ichfeld.  Das  Buck  Daniel  erkldrt,  Berl.,  1868.  Kliefoth,  Das  Buck  Daniels  iihersetzt  und  erHdrt, 
Schwerin,  1868.  Ad.  Kamphausen,  in  Bunsen's  Bihelwerk,  6  half  vols.,  1st  half,  Leips.,  1867. 
H.  Ewald,  Die  Propheten  des  Alien  Bundes,  2d  ed.,  vol.  3,  Gott.,  1868  (tlie  first  ed.  con- 
tained merely  a  monograph  exposition  of  chap.  ix.  24-27 — see  infra).  E.  B.  Pusey,  Lectures 
on  Daniel  tJie  Prophet,  Oxford,  1864.     [Fuller,  Erllarung  des  P.  Daniel,  Basle,  1808.] 

(2)  Roman- Catholic  expositors  since  the  Reformation.  Arias  Montanus,  Comment,  in  Dan., 
Antwerp,  1562.  Hector  Pintus,  Comvientarii  in  Danielem,  Lamentationes  Jeremiw  et  Nahrim, 
(?/i-i;io»  ti<i«<?s,  Coimbra,  1582 ;  Venet,  1583;  Colon.,  1587.  Bened.  Pcrerius,  Commentar ionan 
in  Danielem  proiyh.,  II.  xvi.,  Rom.,  1586;  Lugd.,  1588;  Antv.,  1594.  Casp.  Sanctius,  Com- 
ment, in  Dan.  j'roph.,  Lugd.,  1612, 1619.  Joh.  Maldonatus,  Comment,  in  Jerem.,  Ezech.,  Dan., 
Leyd.,  1011 ;  Par.,  1043.  Jacob  Veldius,  Comment,  in  Dan.  jtroph.  cum  Chronologia  ad  intel- 
ligenda  Jeremim,  Ezech.,  et  Dan.  vaticinia,  Antv.,  1603.  Fabricius  Paulitius,  Comm.  in  Da?i., 
Rom.,  1625.  Ludov.  ab  Alcazar,  Comm.  in  varios  locos  I.  Dan.,  Lugd.,  1631.  Cornelius  a 
Lapide,  August.  Calmst,  and  Dereser-Scholz  in  their  comprehensive  Bible-works.  G.  K. 
Mayer  (Prof,  at  Bamberg),  Die  messianiscjien  Prophezi^n  des  Daniel,  Vienna,  1866. 

MoxoGRAPns. — For  the  critical  and  apologetical  literature,  or  the  principal  monographs 
aiming  ':o  attack  or  defend  the  genuineness  of  the  book  (Bleek,  Kirmss,  Havernick,  Hengstcn- 
berg,  Ziindel,  Fuller,  Volck,  etc.),  see  supra,  §  5. 

Exegetical  monographs :  H.  Venema,  Disseftationes  (see  supra,  II.  1  c).  Thomas  Newton, 
Ahhandlungen  uher  die  Weissagungcn,  weJche  merhroUrdig  erfiiUt  sind  und-noch  his  avf  den 
heiitigen  Tag  in  Erfiillung  gehen  ;  from  the  English,  Leips.,  1757  (containing,  on  p.  304  et 
seq.,  an  apologetical  discussion  of  tlie  visions  concerning  the  world-kingdoms,  chap.  11.  and 
VII.,  which  is  directed  against  Collins,  Grotlus,  and  others).  J.  G.  Scharfenberg,  Specimen 
animadversionum,  quihus  loci  nonnulli  Danielis  et  vett.  ejus  interpretum,  prcesertim  Gi'fccoriim, 
illustrantur  et  emendantur,  Lips.,  1774.  S.  Th.  Wald,  Curarum  in  historiam  textus  Danielis 
specim.  I.,  Lips.,  1783.  Compare  the  essay  by  the  same :  Veber  die  arabisclie  Uebersetzung  de» 
Darnel  in  den  Polyglotten,  in  Eichhorn's  Repert.  fur  hihl.  u.  morgenl.  Literatur,  part  XIV., 
Leips.,  1784.  Laur.  Reinkc,  Die  messian.  Wcissa-gungen  bei  den  grossen  und  lieinen  Propheten 
des  A.  T.,  vol.  iv.  1,  p.  167  et  seq.  (cliietly  an  exposition  of  chap.  ix.  24-27),  Gicssen,  1862. 
H.  Ewald,  Die  P-opheten  des  Alien  Bundes,  1st  ed.,  Stuttgart,  1841,  vol.  II..  appendix  (likewise 
confined  to  the  exposition  of  chap.  ix.  24  et  seq.)  J.  Chr.  Hofmann,  Weissagung  und  Erfiil- 
lung im  A.  und  iV.  T.,  I.,  p.  276  et  seq.,  Nord.,  1841.  The  same.  Die  70  Jahrc  Jeremias  und.  die 
70  JaJirwochen  des  Daniel,  Nuremberg,  1836.  K.  Wieseler,  Die  70  Wochen  und  die  63  Jahrioochen 
des  Propheten  Daniel,  Gotting.,  1839.  The  most  complete  record  of  the  older  exegetical  litera- 
ture on  Dan.  ix.  24-27,  or  on  the  70  weeks  of  years,  may  be  found  in  Abrah.  Calov's  Bihl. 
illustr.,  tom.  I.,  p.  119  et  seq.,  and  in  his  mouogra])]),  De  LXX.  septimanis  myst^erium,  Vitemb., 
1063.  Compare  also  Bertholdt,  Daniel,  etc.,  vol.  II.,  p.  563  et  seq.  ;  Danko,  Ilistoria  revela- 
tionis  divines  Novi  Testamenti,  p.  Ixxiii.  et  seq.  ;  Rauke,  as  above,  p.  211  et  seq.,  and  also 
Reusch,  Die  patristischen  Bereclmungen  der  70  Jahrioochen  Daniels,  in  the  Tiibinger  Theol. 
Quartaischrift,  1868,  No.  IV.,  p.  535  et  seq.  [See  also  the  monographs  cited  by  Danz,  Worter- 
mich,  s.  V.  ;  and  Darling,  Cyclopmlia,  ad  loc] 

[III.  Additional  exegetical  works  on  Daniel  in  the  English  language.  1.  Commentaries  on 
the  entire  book  :  A.  Willett,  A  Six-fold  Commentary  on  Daniel,  etc..  Loud.,  1010,  fol.  E. 
Huit,  The  whole  prophecies  of  Daniel  explained,  etc.,  Lond.,  1643,  4to.  T.  Parker,  The  Visions 
aiid  prophecies  of  Daniel  expounded,  etc.,  Lond.,  1646,  4to.  H.  More,  Exposition  of  the  Prophet 
Daniel,  Lond.,  1681,  4to ;  the  same.  Answers  to  Remarks,  ibid..  1684,  4to ;  the  same.  Supple- 


54:  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 

meiit  and  Defences,  ibid.,  1G85,  4to;  the  same,  Notes  on  Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse,  ibid.,  1085, 
4to.  Auon.,  The  visions  and  prophecies  of  Daniel  expUibud,  etc.,  Lond.,  1700,  12mo.  E. 
Wells,  The  Book  of  Daniel  explained,  etc.,  Lond.,  1716,  4to.  R.  Amner,  An  Essay  toimrds  tht 
interpretation  of  Daniel,  etc.,  Lond.,  1776,  8vo.  J.  H.  Frere,  A  combined  mew  of  the  prophecie4 
of  Daniel,  Eadras,  and  St.  John,  etc.,  Lond.,  1815,  8vo.  W.  Girdlestone,  Observations  on  the 
visions  of  Daniel,  etc.,  Oxf.,  1820,  8v<>.  J.  Wilson,  Dissertations  on  the  hook  of  Daniel,  Oundle, 
1824,  8vo.  F.  A.  Coxe,  Outlines  of  lectures  on  Daniel,  2d  ed..  Lend.,  1834,  12mo.  T.  Wintle, 
An  imjyroved  Version  of  Daniel,  with  Notes,  Lond.,  1836,  8vo.  L.  Gaussen,  Lectures  on  tlie 
Book  (f  Daniel,  Lond.,  1840,  12rao.  C.  P.  3Iiles,  Lectures  on  Daniel,  Lond.,  1840-41,  2  vols., 
1 2rao.  B.  Harrison,  Prophetic  Outlines  of  the  Christian  Church,  etc.  (Warburtou  Lectures),  Lond ., 
1849,  8vo.  M.  Stuart,  A  Commentary  on  the  Book  of  Daniel,  Andover,  1850,  8vo.  A.  Barnes,  Notes 
on  Daniel,  N.  Y.,  1850,  12mo.  J.  Cumming,  Lectures  on  the  Book  of  Daniel,  Lond.,  1850,  8vo. 
W.  Ramsay,  Exposition  of  the  hook  of  Daniel,  Lond.,  1853,  12mo.  J.  Bellamy,  New  Transla- 
tion of  the  hook  of  Daniel,  etc.,  Lond.,  1863,  4to.  W.  Shrewsbury,  Notes  on  the  hook  of  Daniel, 
Edinb.,  1865,  8vo.  P.  S.  Desprez,  The  Apocalypse  of  the  Old  Test,  Lond.,  1865,  8vo.  H. 
Cowlcs,  Ezekiel  and  Daniel,  rcith  Notes,  N.  T.,  1867,  12mo.  AV.  H.  Rule,  Historical  Exposition 
of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  Lond.,  1869,  8vo.  (adopts  the  year-day  theory,  and  applies  the  little  horn 
to  the  papacy).  W.  Kelly,  Notes  on  the  Book  of  Daniel,  Edinb.,  1870,  12mo.  C.  F.  Keil,  The 
Book  of  the  pjrophet  Daniel  (being  part  of  Keil  and  Delitzsch's  Commentary  on  the  Old  Testa- 
ment), Edinb.,  1872,  8vo.,  from  the  German.  L.  Strong,  Lectures  on  the  Book  of  Daniel,  Lond., 
1872,  8vo.  Prof.  Gaussen,  The  Prophesies  of  Daniel  Explained,  translated  by  Blaekstone, 
Lond.,  1873,  8vo  (makes  the  fourth  kingdom  Rome). 

3.  Monographs. — T.  Bnghtmnn,  Exposition  of  the  last  part 'of  Daniel,  Lond.,  1644,  4to.  Ab- 
onymous,  An  Essay  on  Scripture  Prophecy,  s.  1.  [probably  Lond.],  1724  (makes  the  fourth  beast 
Rome).  Z.  Grey,  Examination  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton's  Ohservations  upon  Daniel,  etc.  (treats  only  of 
the  special  points  named  in  the  title),  Lond.,  1736,  8vo.  6.  Burton,  An  Essay  on  the  Numbers  of 
Daniel  and  St.  John,  Norwich,  1766-68,  2  vols.,  8vo.  Anon.,  Seven  projfhetical  periods,  etc., 
Lond.,  1790,  4to.  G.  S.  F.aber.  Dissertation  on  Daniel's  70  Weeks  (makes  them  extend  from 
the  17th  of  Artaxerxes  to  the  15th  of  Tiberius),  Lond.,  1811,  8vo.  See  also  his  Sacred  Calen- 
dar of  Prophecy,  Lond.,  1838,  3  vols.  8vo.,  in  which  he  argues  at  length  for  the  year-day 
theoiy.  E.  Irving,  Babylon  and  Infidelity  foreimmed,  etc.  (adopts  the  year-day  theoi7  with 
its  consequences),  Glasgow,  1826,  3  v(j1s.  8vo.  ;  ibid,  1828,  8vo.  J.  Tyso,  An  elucidation,  etc., 
shoicinff  that  the  Seventy  Weeks  have  not  yet  taken  place,  Lond.,  1838,  8vo.  J.  Farquharsou, 
Illustrations  of  Daniel's  last  vision  and  prophecy,  Lond.,  1838,  8vo.  N".  S.  Folsom,  Interpreta- 
tion of  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  (against  Millerism,  and  of  course  rejects  the  reference  of  the 
fourth  kingdom  to  Rome),  Boston,  1843,  12mo.  L  T.  Hinton,  Prophecies  of  Daniel  and  John 
(applies  the  third  empire  to  the  Turks,  and  the  fourth  to  Rome).  St.  Louis,  1843,  12mo.  L 
Chase,  Remarks  on  the  Book  of  Daniel  (applies  the  "  little  horn  "  exclusively  to  Antiochus  Epiph- 
anes),  Boston,  1844,  12mo.  G.  Junkin,  The  Little  Stone  of  the  &'?■<■«« ///wc^e  (interprets  the 
"little  horn"  of  the  Papacy),  Phila.,  1844,  8vo.  T.  R.  Birks,  The  two  later  visions  of  Daniel 
(makes  the  fourth  kingdom  Rome),  Lond.,  1846,  12mo.  S.  Lee,  Events  and  Times  of  the  Visions 
of  Daniel  and  St.  John  (makes  the  "little  horn  "  exclusively  heathen  Rome),  London,  1851,  8vo. 
A.  M.  Osbon,  Daniel  verified  in  History,  etc.  (makes  the  fourth  kicgdom  Rome),  N.  Y., 
1856,  13mo.  J.  Oswald,  The  kingdom  which  shall  not  he  destroyed,  etc.  (makes  the  fourth  king- 
dom Rome),  Phila.,  1856,  12mo.  S.  Sparkes,  A  Historical  Commentary  on  Daniel  xi.  (adopts 
the  year-day  theory,  and  applies  the  whole  chapter  to  modem  times),  Binghamton,  1858,  8vo. 
W.  R.  A.  Boyle,  The  Inspiration  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  (applies  the  fourth  kindom  to  the 
Roman  Empire),  Lond..  1863,  8vo.  S.  P.  Tregclles,  Remarks  on  the  Visions  of  Daniel,  etc. 
(rejects  the  year-day  theory  with  its  conclusions),  Lond.,  fifth  ed.,  1864,  13mo.  R.  Phillips, 
On  Daniel's  Numbers,  Lond.,  1864,  12mo.  L.  A.  Sawyer,  Daniel  with  its  apocryphal  additions 
(a  new  translation),  Bost ,  1864,  12mo.  R.  A.  Watkinson.  The  End  as  foretold  in  Daniel, 
etc.  (adopts  the  year -day  theory),  N.  Y.,  1865,  12mo.  F.  W.  Bosanquet,  Messiah  the  Prince, 
Lond  ,  1866,  8v(i.  H.  W.  Taylor,  The  Times  of  Daniel  (adopts  the  year-day  theory),  N.  Y. 
1871,  12mo.  H.  Loomis,  T^c  Great  Conflict  (makes  the  little  horn  the  Papacy),  N.  Y.,  1874, 
12mo.l 


THE 


BOOK    OF    THE    PROPHET    DANIEL. 


FIRST  (HISTORICAL)  PART. 

Chapters  I.-VI. 

1.  Introduction.     The  Early  H'Mory  of  Danid  and  his  Tliree  Associates. 

I.  1-21. 

1  In  the  tliircl  year  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakitn  king  of  Judah  came  Nebuchad- 

2  nezzar  king  of  Babylon  iinto  Jerusalem  and  besieged  it.'  And  the  Lord  gave 
Jehoiakim  kins;  of  Judah  into  his  hand,  with  [and]  pavt  oithe  vessels  oittte  house  of 
God,  which  [ami]  he  carried  [them]  into  the  land  of  Shinar,  to  the  house  of  his  god  ;' 
and  he  brought  the  vessels  into  the  treasure-house^  of  his  god.' 

3  And  the  king  spake*  unto  Ashpenaz  the  master'  of  his  eunuchs,  that  he  should 
bring  [to  bring]  certain  oi  the  children  of  Israel,  and  of  the  king's  seed,"  and  of  the 

4  princes  ;'  children'  in  whom  was  no  blemish,  but  [and]  well-tavoured,"  and  skilful'" 
in  all  wisdom,  and  cunning  "in  knowledge,  and  understanding '"  science,  and  such 
as  had  ability  "  in  them  [in  whom  xoas  ability]  to  stand  in  the  king's  palace,  and 
whom  they  might  teach'*  the  learning  "  and  the  tongue  oi  the  Chaldseans. 

5  And  the  king  appointed  them  a  daily  provision'"  of  the  king's  meat,"  and  of 
the  wine  lohich  ho  drank;  so  nourishing  [,  and  to  make  grow]  them  three  years, 
that  [;  and]  at  tlie  end  thereof  they  might  [should]   stand  before  the  king. 

6  Xow  [And]  among  these  [them]  were  of  tlie  children  of  Judah,  Daniel,  Hana- 

7  niah  [Chananyah  |,  Mishael,  and  Azariah  ;  unto  whom  [and  to  them]  the  prince 
of  the  eunuchs  gave  [assigned]  names  :  for  he  gave  [and  he  assigned]  unto  Daniel, 
tlie  name  of  Belteshazzar ;  and  to  Hananiah,  of  Shadrach  ;  and  to  Mishael,  of 
Mesliach  ;  and  to  Azariah,  o/' Abed-nego. 

S  But  [And]  Daniel  purposed  in"  his  heart  that  he  would  not  defile  himself  with 
the  portion  of  the  kmg^s  meat,"  nor  [and]  with  the  wine  w/n'c/t  he  drank  :  there- 
fore [and]  he  requested  of  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  that  he  might  not  defile 

9  himself     Now  [And]  God  had  brought  [gave]   Daniel  into  favour  and  tender 

10  love "  with  [before]  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs.  And  the  prince  of  the 
eunuchs  said  unto  Daniel,  1  fear  my  lord  the  king,  who  hath  appointed  your 
meat  [food]  and  j'our  drink  : "  for  why  should  he  see  your  faces  worse  liking 
[more  gloomy]  than  the  children"  which  are  of  your  sort  ?"  then  shall  [,  and 
should]  ye  make  »ie  endanger  my  head  to  the  king? 

1 1  Then   [And]   said   Daniel  to  [the]   Melzar,  whom  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs 

12  had  set  over  Daniel,  Hananiah,  Mishael,  and  Azariah:  Prove  thy  servants,  I 
beseech  thee,  ten  days  ;  and  let  them  give  us  pulse  to  eat,"^  and  water  to  drink. 

13  Then  [And]  let  our  countenances  be  looked  upon  before  thee,  and  the  counte- 
nance of  the  children  '  that  eat  of  the  portion  of  the'king's  meat;"  and  as  thou 

14  seest    [shalt   see],  deal    [do]   with    thy    servants.      So  he   consented    [And  he 

15  hearkened]  to  them  in  [as  to]  this  matter,  and  proved  them  ten  davs.  And  at 
the  end  of  ten  days  their  countenances  appeared  [countenance  was  seen  to  be 
good]  fairer  and  [the\-  were]  fatter  in  [of]  flesh  than  all  the  children'  which  did 


>(j  •  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


16  eaX  the  portion  of  the  king's  meat."  Thus  [And  the]  Melzar  took  away  th* 
portion  o/' their  meat,"  and  the  wine  thatX\\Q.y  should  drink  and  gave  them  pidse.'' 

17  [And]  -4«_/bc  these  four  children,'  God  gave  them  knowledge  and  skill  in  all 
learning  "  and  wisdom :  and  Daniel  had  understanding  in  all  visions  [every 
vision]  and  dreams. 

18  Now,  [x\nd]  at  the  end  of  the  days  that  the  king  had  said'  he  should  [to] 
bring  th^Mu  in,  then  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  brougiu  them  in  before  Nebuchad- 

19  nezzar.  And  the  king  communed  [spake]  with  them:  and  among  them  all 
was   found    none    like     Daniel,    Hananiah,    JMishael,    and    Azariah :     therefore 

20  [and]  stood  they  before  the  king.   And  in  all  matters  [every  matter]  of  wisdom 
and  understanding,  that  the   king  inquired  of  them,  [then]  he   found   them  ten  . 
times  better  than  "  all   the  magicians  ''*  and  astrologers "  that  viere  in  all  his 
realm. 

21  And  Daniel  continued  "  even  unto  the  first  year  of  king  Cyrus. 

GRAMMATICAL   AND    LEXICAL   NOTES. 

[*  n"ibS  12*1.  and  pressed  upon  it,  namely,  with  the  usual  military  appliances. — '  T^H'TX,  fti5  gods,  probablj 
referring  to  the  Babylonian  polytheism,  in  contrast  with  the  true  God  above,  CTibsP.  —  '  ISIH  T.^Si  store-houM, 
some  room  connected  with  the  temple  of  Belns.— «  IXIK'S],  and  said,  in  the  Chaldaizing  sense  of  commanded.— 
s  -~.,  chief,  principal  or  head  man.— «  ~~i;?2~  S'^'-  seed  of  the  ktngdom,  namely,  of  Judah.— '  a"'^B'^B~»  '*< 
lu/bles,  a  Persic  word  denoting  the  aiistoovcy. — s  n*^~b''»  youtlts,  or  lads,  between  infancy  and  adolescence. — '  "^^1^3 
ns"'^,  good  of  appearance,  i.e.,  hand.iome.—'«  ^'^^"'^i  intelligent,  i.e.,  of  quick  natural  parts.— "  '"'>  knmcing, 
i.e..  by  acquired  information.— >'  1:1::?;,  considerate,  i.e.,  of  attentive  habits.—"  ns,  vigor,  i.e.,  physical  strength, 
and  perhaps  including  mental  energy.—  *  OTsiblt  «'"*  ">  '«"^'*  """"•  '•«••  "=*"^  **™  ^  ^^  instructed.  This  clauB« 
is  to  be  connected  in  construction  with  the  preceding  S"^3nl;,  ver.  3.—"  ICC.  tool;  i.e.,  the  formularies  or  written 
mysteries.—"  i?3i^3  Ci"'  SjI-  a  word  (or  matter)  of  a  day  in  its  doy,  a  regular  ration  from  day  to  day.— "  33rB) 
delicacy,  a  Tersian  word  denoting  luxurious  rfnnd-s'.  — '»  ;5  aC'^1,  oss^ned  wpoii,  r.c,  imposed  this  as  a  consciem- 
tioiis  duty.—"  a~'3n"'i  mercies,  i.e.,  kind  consideration  of  his  scruples.— '°  naifir?;,  is  regarded  by  the  Gram- 
marians as  an  instance  of  an  epenthetic  i  in  the  sing.,  or  perhaps  an  older  foi-m  of  the  construction  in  which  the  final  ,1 
has  given  place  to  a  cognate  letter.—-'  D;b"'3;<  according  to  your  circle,  i.e.,  in  point  of  age  and  rank.  There  is, 
however,  iMssibly  an  allusion  to  their  emasculated  condition.  Eunuchs  are  constantly  represented  on  the  Aiwyrian  monu- 
ments as  being  "of  fuller  habit  th.in  other  men.— ='  n;:!*:i  a^J!l:i~— j?;,  of  the  se«i-fruits,  and  u:e  icill  surely  eat. 
I.e.,  eiclnsively  vegetable  diet.— »'  ;7  "TJ"'  "lb?>  <«"  hands  (parts)  abore,  ten-fold  superior  to.— '•  CSy"!!  i« 
generally  explained  by  the  lexicographers  as  derived  from  'syi',  a  style,  hence  scribes,  the  Magian  ieiioypafi-iiartlt. 
Perhaps  it  signifies  horosconists.—''^  a*E™'s.  from  tl'Jlt,  to  whisper  incantation,  hence  are  magician.':  in  the  broad 
gcnce. -*  in"*!!  teas  alive  and  influential  in  that  official  capacity.] 

ers   (cf.   3  Kings  xsiv.   1 ;    xxv.   1  ;    Ezra  ii.   1 ; 

V.  12.  etc.).     Jeremiah  (sxT.    1;   xxxix.   1,   11; 

xliii.  10)  and  Ezekiel  (xxix.  18)  have  -I'JSi^^rii:. 

which  corresponds  more  exactly  to   the  older 
„.    ,  ,       J      .  rendering   NabukutJiirr-tt.vir,   as   found   in   the 

rei^  of  Jehoiakim.  "ft  e  have  already  shown,  ,  B^bvlonian  cuneiform  inscriptions,  and  also  to 
in  the  Introd..  §  8,  note  2,  that  this  does  not  t^e  "nearly  identical  Persian  form  Nabuklmd- 
conflict  with  Jcr.  xxv.  1,  9.— Came  Nebuchad-  ,  ,.„  ,  ^.^^^^^  occurs  at  Behistun  (see  Oppert. 
nezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  unto  Jerusalem,  and  1  jj^^^.^^  .j^.,,  _  jggj_  p  4^,5.  ^^.j^^fHt^  ^n  Mhnpo- 
besieged  it,  i.  e. ,  he  departed  for  Jerusalem,  m  ^^.^^^  .^  ^  35-.  ^^  ^  -jj^^  ^^^^  certainly  compre- 
order  to  besiege  it;  he  began  his  expedition  j^^^^  ^^  j^^  ^^^  element,  the  name  of  the 
asrainst  Jerusalem,  which  resulted  m  the  siege     „,    , ,  ■,    ,- ,         nr  <---   t  1   ■ 

o!  that  citv.     For  the  view  that  His  is  here  to  i  Chaldtean  god  Aebo,  =.  Mercurj-  (  -,,  Isa.  xIm. 


ESEGETR'AL    REMARKS, 

Verses  1,  2.    The  trnmportation  to  Babylon,  by 
Kehiirhadiiezzar. — In    the    third    year    of    the 


be  takeu-in  the  sense  of  ••departing,"  see  the 
Introd.,  g  8,  2.  a. — Instead  of  i?  1?^,  to  straiten, 
besiege,  we  generally  find  elsewhere  "'?^!'  with 
the  dative,  e.  g.,  Deut.  xxviii,  52;  1  Kings  viii. 
37,  —The  form  of  the  name  "■is^":-::   is  the 


1),  and  it  seems  also  to  include  the  terms  kadr, 
"might,"  and  !ar  =  ~~,  '•prince"  (compare 
Gesenius,  Thcsaur.,  p.  890;  Oppert,  1.  c).  The 
name  is  rendered  with  either  n  or  /•  by  Greek 
authors;  for  whUe  Strabo  (15.  i.  0)  writes  No- 
iini,ntSi)unopni,  Berosus  (in  Josephus  contr.  Ap.,  i 


one  in  general  use  among  the  later  Hebrew  writ-  I  20,   21)    has   Na.i»tvv«Wucro/'o,,   and  the  Sept. 


CHAP.  I.  1-21. 


57 


JiaSoi'xoSovoaop.  Instead  of  ~?''-.lr''"-!i  liow- 
erer,  our  book  elsewhere  has  uniformlj'  ^2:", 
omitting  the  euphonic  «  ;  cf.  -3,  chap.  iii.  25  i 
vii.  15,  instead  of  s^n.  chap.  iu.  6.  11,  etc. ;  iv.  7. 

[According  to  Ptolemy's  chronological  cuiwii 
of  the  reigns  of  the  Babj-lonian  lungs,  Nebu- 
chadnezzar became  king  near  the  close  of  B.C. 
605,  whereas  his  expedition  in  question,  falling 
in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim,  occurred  late  in 
B.C.  (iOT,  and  the  capture  of  the  city,  in  Jehoia- 
kim's  fourth  year,  fell  about  the  middle  of  B.C. 
006.  It  appears,  however  (Josephus  Aiilig. 
X.  11,  1),  that  his  father,  Nabopolassar,  during 
his  ovm  lifetime,  and  near  the  close  of  his 
reign,  had  sent  him  to  repel  Pharaoh-Necho  at 
Carchemish,  and  on  his  way  back,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar captured  Jerusalem,  as  related  by  Daniel. 
WhUe  he  was  engaged  in  this  campaign,  his 
father  died,  and  he  hastened  back  to  Babylon  in 
order  to  assume  the  reins  of  government.  By  the 
Jews,  therefore,  his  reign  is  naturally  reckoned 
from  the  date  of  this  conquering  expedition, 
although  he  did  not  actually  become  full  king 
at  Babylon  till  a  year  or  more  later.  J 

Terse  3.  And  the  Lord  gave  .  .  .  into  his 
band,  i.e.,  into  his  power.  Compare  Gen.  ix.  3, 
20;  Ex.  iv.  31;  3  Sam.  xviii.  3;  also  Ps.  xcv.  7, 
etc.  The  designation  of  Jehovah  simply  as 
'•  Lord  "  C;"'!*)  is  not  confined  to  later  writers, 
e.  g.,  Ezra  x.  3;  Neh.  i.  11,  but  occurs  as  early 
as  Gen.  xviii.  37 ;  Judges  xiii.  8  ;  Psa.  xvi.  3  ; 
XXXV.  2:j,  etc. —  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah. 
Jehoiakim  reigned  eleven  years,  according  to  2 
Kings  xxiii.  'Hi ;  3  Chron.  xxxvi.  5,  while  the 
conquest  by  Nebuchadnezzar  here  referred  to 
can  hardly  have  taken  place  later  than  the 
fourth  year  of  this  reign  (see  Introd.  §  8,  Note 
2,  and  particularly  what  is  there  remarked  in 
opposition  to  Kranichf  eld).  Hence  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  consider  the  passage  before  us  as  describ- 
ing a  conquest  which  put  an  end  to  the  rule  nf 
Jehoiakim,  but  rather  an  event  which  resulted 
in  his  becoming  the  va.ssal  of  Nebuchadnezzar  ; 
or,  more  correctly,  of  Nabopolassar,  who  was 
yet  living.  Similarly,  what  follows  does  not 
assert  an  actual  banishment  of  Jehoiakim,  but 
merely  his  temporary  removal  to  Babylon,  and 
perhaps  not  even  this. — And  a  part  ot  the  ves- 
se  s  of  the  house  of  God,  i.e..  of  the  sacred 
vessels  of  the  temple,  which  are  again  men- 
tioned in  chap.  v.  2  et  seq.* — CiSpO,  instead  of 
which  several  manuscripts  have  P^i?'?  (cf.  Theo- 
dotion's    ctJtu   fitp.i',-),    is    compounded   of    ri^j5 

"end,"  and  the  preposition  T?,  and,  therefore, 
its  literal  meaning  is  "  from  the  end,"  "  on  ex- 
piration," in  which  sense  it  occurs  in  vs.  5,  15, 
and  lb  of  this  chapter.  In  this  place,  where  it 
serves  to  designate  a  quantity  instead  of  denot- 
ing time,  it  evidently  expresses  the  idea  of  an 
integral  part,  a  considerable  part,  like  the  Chal- 
dee    r^p  y^    in  chap.    ii.    42,   and  like    riSp": 

*  ["Dnniel  ib  cnxefiil  to  say  (with  historical  Accuracy) 
that  at  this  time  the  king  of  Babylun  took  away  only  a  part 
of  the  vessels  of  the  t<-mple.  ilany  more  were  taken  ilnriiig 
the  ..horl  rei'jn  of  Jeconiah  (see  '2  Kings  xxiv.  l-*!),  and  yet 
tocQe  were  left  behind  even  then,  to  be  taken  at  the  final  de- 
etniction  of  the  city  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiab  ( Jer.  xxrii. 
■lt-ii)."—CowUf.} 


in  Neh.  vii.  70.  In  explaining  this  meaning  it 
is  not  necessary  to  assume  (with  llitzig)  that 
~^p  may  here  be  equivalent  to  '"a  part,"  for 
the  word  bears  this  sense  iu  no  other  instance. 
The  word,  rather,  indicates  that  the  store  iu 
question,  from  end  to  end,  has  contributed  a 
share,  and  throughout  its  extent  some  portion 
has  been  taken  away.  Hence  ''from  the  end  of 
the  vessels  of  the  temple "  signifies  merely  a 
portion  of  all  its  vessels.  Cf.  Kranichf  eld  on  this 
passage ;  Gesen. -Dietrich  8.  v.  ~^?.  [Furst, 
however  (Heb.  Lex.  s.  v.),  adopts  the  simple  ex- 
planation that  '^^p'3  is  merely  an  alternative 
form  of  r^^p,  and  this  is  certainly  corroborated 
by  the  form  P2p^i^,  chap.  i.  18,  where  two  pre- 
positions cannot  be  tolerated.]  This  view  is  also 
essentially  established  by  3  Chron.   xxxvi.   7 : 

Which   he  carried  into  the  land  of  Shinar ; 

rather,  "  And  he  caused  them  to  be  brought  to 
the  land  of  Shinar," — to  Babylonia,  which  pro- 
vince is  here  called  by  the  ancient  name  that 
occurs  outside  of  Genesis  (see  Gen.  x.  10;  xi. 
2  ;  xiv.  1),  only  in  the  elevated  language  of  the 
prophets,  e.g.,  in  Isa.  xi.  11;  Zech.  v.  11. — The 
suffix  in  CS^;^]  "and  he  caused  them  to  be 
taken  away,"  can  hardly  be  taken  (as  do  Hiivem. 
and  others)  as  referring  exclusively  to  the 
sacred  vessels,  the  mention  of  which  immedi- 
ately precedes  this  sentence ;  for  the  following 
words  refer  to  them  again,  and  tHus  distinguish 
them  as  a  particular  of  the  collective  object  of 
the  verb  stn^.n.  *  We  are  not  obliged,  however, 
to  include  the  king  Jehoiakim  among  those  who 
were  carried  away  with  the  sacred  utensils  ;  for 
while  the  narrative  in  its  progress  postulates  the 
presence  in  Babylon  of  Jewish  youths  belong- 
ing to  llje  royal  and  to  noble  families,  it  never 
implies  the  presence  of  the  king  himself  (cf.  vs. 
3,  G ;  also  v.  13) ;  and  while  it  is  related  in  2 
Chron.  xxxvi.  B,  that  Nebuchadnezzar  bound 
Jehoiakim  "  in  fetters,  to  cany  him  to  Babylon," 
it  is  not  expressly  stated  that  he  executed  that 
purpose.  The  Sept.  {kiu  tojjotv  airui  ii  \a'/\(ii^ 
irahu:  nai  ai-fiyayei^avTov  t'lr  Ba0v''.(',tva)  first  imposed 
this  sense  on  the  passage,  because  they  felt  com- 
pelled to  assume  an  actual  deportation  of  Jehoi- 
akim. followed  by  his  return  to  Jerusalem  at 
a  later  period — an  opinion  which  w;,'is  shared  by 
the  writer  of  the  3d  Book  of  Esdras  and  the 
Vulgate,  and  by  several  rabbins  of  the  Jliddle 
Ages,  e.g.,  Ibn-Ezra.  WhOe  the  passage  before 
us  does  not  directly  contradict  this  assumption, 
which  represents  the  fate  of  Jehoiakim  as  very 
similar  to  that  of  Manasseh  (3  Chron.  xixiii.  13), 
it  does  not  necessarily  compel   its    adoption. 


*  [Stuart,  on  the  contrarj*,  insists  that  the  following  clause 
compels  us  to  understand  the  same  object  of  Si'^Znin  both 
cases;  but  he  overstrains  the   particle     PX     by   the    ren- 
dering *'  tfte  ftaitie."     The  English  Auth.  Version  interprets 
in  a  similar  manner.     But  the  latter  clause  certainly  implies 
a  distinction  lietween  the  objects  carried  away,  some  of  which 
were  deposited  in  a  prtrticuLir   s(iot.     The  author  is,  there- 
fore, correct  in  understanding  the  usfuK'iaits  of  the  king  to 
be  included  generally  under  the  mention  of  hi=  name,  bat 
I  not  himself  particularly  ;  he  is  inconsistent,  however,  a  little 
I  farther  on,  as  we  shall  see,  in  destroying  the  whole  founda, 
I  tion  of  this  distinction,  in  the  interpretation  of  the  laat 
clause  of  t^e  vetEe.] 


58 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Jehoiakim  may  be  included  among  the  trans- 
ported Jews  who  are  designated  by  the  plural 
suffix  in  cs«"~"'1 ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
suffix  may,  in  addition  to  the  temple-vessels, 
simply  designate  a  band  of  noble  Jews,  whom 
the  conqueror  carried  away  as  hostages,  and  to 
which  the  youth  referred  to  in  v.  3  et  seq.  be- 
longed— hence  those  D"'"I1iT^,  whose  presence 
may  be  gathered  from  the  coUective  singular 
m^n^,  to  which  reference  has  already  been 
made  (Kranichfeld ;  cf.  Ibn-Ezra,  Maldonat, 
Geier,  and  others  ;  also  Bertheau  in  Kurzge- 
fasatcs  exig.  HandbucJi  zur  Chronik,^.  4^7). — 
To  the  house  of  his  god — rather  "  to  the  dwel- 
ling-place of  his  gods."  l^ribs'tTia  is  probably 
to  be  regarded  as  in  opposition  with  T"!*? 
"^".2  ;  for  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  temple  at 
Jerusalem,  as  has  been  shown,  formed  only  a 
part  of  the  object  in  CS^:";! ;  and,  besides,  if 
n"nb!<  r^a  in  this  place  were  iutended  to  desig- 
nate the  temple  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  god  (or 
gods),  usage  would  require  the  particle  J^ 
in  order  to  manifest  the  object  towards  which 
the  motion  is  directed  (see  Gen.  xxxi.  4 ;  Isa. 
xxxvii.  33  ;  Zech.  xi.  13).  The  correct  view  is 
stated  by  Hitzig  and  Kranichfeld.  who  refer  to 
Hos.  viii.  1  ;  ix.  15  ;  Ex.  xxix.  45  ;  Num.  xxxv. 
3,  etc..  in  support  of  the  tropical  signification, 
which  takes  j-^2  iu  the  sense  of  "land  or  dwel- 
ling-place." [Keil,  however,  shows  the  inaccu- 
racy of  this  criticism,  on  grammatical  grounds. 
Moreover,  in  this  way  the  distmction  evidently 
intended  between  the  different  classes  of  objects 
tran.sported,  is  wholly  taken  away  ;  the  persons 
were  merely  removed  to  Babylon,  but  the  uten- 
sils were  lodged  in  a  heathen  temple,  as  they 
before  had  belonged  to  Jehovah's.  The  parallel 
history.  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  6,  7,  states  all  this 
explicitly.  Daniel  here  merely  rehearses  the 
facts  in  a  general  way,  but  is  nevertheless  care- 
ful to  mention  the  disposal,  both  of  the  captives, 
of  whom  he  was  himself  one  (chap.  ii.  25), 
and  the  vessels,  which  afterwards  became  so 
important  in  his  narrative  (chap.  v.  2,  23).] 
Whether  the  genitive  l^H-^  be  translated  "of 
his  gods"  (cf.  chap.  ii.  47;  iii.  29  ;  iv.  6,  15)  or 
"of  his  god,"  is  unimportant.  In  the  lat- 
ter case,  the  reference  is  to  Bel,  the  chief 
divinity  of  the  Babylonians ;  cf.  Isa.  xlvi.  1  ; 
Jer.  1.  2;  Ii.  44. — And  he  brought  the  ves- 
sels into  the  treasure-house  i  i  his  gods  (or 
"his god,"  viz.:  Bel).  On  ^:f i!<  ri-":!,  treasure- 
house  yn^nipvAaKtnv^  compare  Mai.  iii.  10;  Neh. 
xiii.  5,  12,  13,  where  the  treasury  of  the  second 
temple  is  the  subject  of  remark.  There  is  no 
contradiction  between  this  passage  and  chap.  v. 
2  et  seq.  where  the  sacred  vessels  are  profaned 
by  Belshazzar,  and  thus  appear  to  have  been 
stored  in  his  palace.  Belshazzar  was  not  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, and  it  is  conceivable  that  the  son 
could  trample  in  the  mire  what  his  father  and 
predecessor  had  valued  and  reserved  (cf.  Ephr. 
Syr.  on  this  passage).  Nor  is  there  a  contradic; 
tiou  of  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  7  ;  the  statement  in  that 
passage:    "And   he   put   them   in  his  palace" 


act  than  the  one  before  us ;  [or  rather,  perhaps, 
iS'^n  is  then  used  La  its  frequent  signification  ol 
temple,  as  all  the  older  versions  render,  and  the 
suffix  "  /ijs  "  designates  it  as  that  of  his  favorite 
deity]. 

Verses  8,  4.  The  selection  of  youthful  Jews  of 
noble  rank  for  sercice  at  the  royal  court.  And 
the  king  spake  unto  (commanded)  Ashpenaz, 
the  master  of  his  eunuchs,  'r?''?^,  a  name, 
whose  formation  is  very  similar  to  that  of 
T:3'i'X,  Gen.  x.  3,  but  not  to  be  identified  with 
it  on  that  account  (as  Hitzig  suggests)  without 
further  inquiry.  It  appears  to  be  of  Indo-Ger- 
manic  origin,  and,  according  to  Rodiger,  is  com- 
pounded of  the  Sanscrit  oqea,  "horse,"  and 
nasa,  "nose."  It  is,  therefore,  equivalent  to 
"horse-nose."— n"'C'i"iD  ai_,  the  chief  of  the 
eunuchs  (Sept.  apxievvovxnc, ;  Vulgate,  prcepon- 
tus  eunuchorum),  an  important  and  influential 
officer  of  the  palace  at  Oriental  courts,  as  may  be 
shown  from  the  position  of  the  Kislar-Aga  at 
the  Turkish  court  in  our  day.  However,  neither 
he  nor  his  subordinates  are  to  be  regarded  as 
actual  eunuchs,  but  rather  as  ordinary  chamber- 
lains (Luther:  "  oberster  Kammerer").  Com- 
pare Gen.  xxxvii.  3U ;  xxxix.  1,  7,  where 
Joseph's  master  at  the  court  of  Pharaoh 
is  called  n''~C,  although  he  was  married; 
also  1  Sam.  viii.  15;  1  Kings  xxii.  9;  xxv.  19, 
etc.,  in  all  of  which  the  rendering  of  O^^O 
by  "chamberlain"  or  court-official  is  adequate. 
However,  the  subordinates  of  Ashpenaz,  men- 
tioned in  the  passage  under  consideration,  may 
be  regarded  as  actual  evmuchs  (as  also  those  in 
Esth.  i.  10,  12,  15;  ii.  3,  14;  iv.  5),  without 
necessitating  the  conclusion  that  Daniel  and  his 
associates  also  became  eunuchs,  on  their  being 
placed  under  his  super\  ision.  Only  a  grossly 
carnal  conception  of  the  facts  narrated  in  this 
chapter,  and  of  Isaiah's  prophecy,  Isa.  xxxix. 
7  (where  ciO  likewise  means  [or  may  mean] 
an  official  generally)  could  lead  to  this  opinion, 
which  is  entertained  by  a  number  of  Jewish  and 
older  Christian  commentators,  e.g.,  Josephus, 
Antiguit.,  X.  11 ;  the  Targum,  on  Esther  iv.  5; 
Rashi,  on  Dan.  i.  21  ;  Origen  Ilinnil.  iv.  on  Ezek. ; 
Jerome,  ailr.  Jovin.  i.  1 ;  and  Job.  Damascenus, 
Ve  fide  orthod.  iv.  25.*  It  is  not  even  possibla 
to  argue  from  the  relations  of  Daniel  to  the 
master  of  the  eunuchs,  as  indicated  in  this  pas- 
sage, that  the  prophet  always  remained  un- 
maiTied  (as  Pseudo-Epiphanius  i'c  I'j't.  prrophet., 
c.  10,  Cornelius  a  Lapide,  Huetius,  and  others, 
suggest).  See  the  Introd. ,  g  2.  — 1  hat  he  should 
bring  certain  of  the  children  of  Israel — i.  e. ,  to 
choose  of  the  children  of  Israel,  viz. :  of  the 
Jews,  who  had  been  carried  to  Babylon  as  hos- 
tages, cf.  V.  2.  The  more  comprehensive  phrase, 
"the  children  of  Israel,"  is  justified  by  the  fact 
that  the  theocratic  state  under  Jehoiakim  in- 
cluded all  of  the  tribes  of  Benjamin  and  Levi, 
and  at  least  fragments  of  several  other  tribes, 
especially  of  Simeon  (2  Chron.  xv.  9),  in  addi- 

*  [Rather,  a  strictly  literal  interpretation  of  Isa.  .xxxix,  7.  a3 
well  as  all  the  probabilities  and  analogies  of  the  case,  requii  eg 
this  view,  which  the  majority  of  cummentatora  have  accord- 
ingly taken.  The  case  of  Joseph's  master  afford.s  no  diffi- 
culty, for  eunuchs  of  high  rank  are  often  ii-arried  (cf .  Kcclus, 
XX.  4;  xxv.  20);  indeed  the  Fupposition  of  hlB  impoteno* 
affords  some  explanation  of  his  wife's  solicitation  of  Joseph.) 


CHAP.  I.  1-21. 


59 


tion  to  the  leading  tribe  of  Judah. — And  of  the 
king's  seed,  and  ol   the  princes— rather,    "of 

the  royal  seed,  as  well  as  of  the  number  of 
nobles."  Instead  of  this  correlative  view  of  the 
two  "'s — the  only  correct  view — which  is  found 
in  Von  Lengerke,  and  in  Hitzig,  and  others, 
Bertholdt.  without  reason,  adopts  the  designa- 
tive  (eit/ur—or),  while  a  majority,  including 
Havemick,  take  the  first  1  (before  y^l,  which, 
however,  is  wanting  in  several  of  Kennicott's 
and  De  Rossi's  manuscripts. — but  the  authen- 
ticity of  which  is  not,  on  that  account,  to  be 
questioned)  in  the  sense  of  "and  indeed," 
"namely," — hence  as  marking  the  use  of  an 
emphatic  apposition.  Our  view  is  supported  by 
parallel  passages,  such  as  chap,  vii  20;  viii  13, 
etc. — The  term  S^':ri"^Sn,  "nobles,"  "mag- 
nates." which  occurs  only  here  and  in  Esth.  i. 
3  ;  vi  M,  seems  to  be  borrowed  from  the  Persian, 
and  to  be  equivalent  to  the  Pehlevi  pardom, 
"the  first."  "the  noble;"  cf.  the  Sanscrit 
pi-athrniui,  Zend  frnthema,  Greek  -/lurcf.  Its 
derivation  from  the  Greek  -jionuoi,  essayed  by 
Bertholdt,  as  well  as  the  opinion  which  pre- 
vailed among  older  expositors,  that  the  word  is 
of  Hebrew  origin,  and  perhaps  related  to  mc, 
invalidt,  are  to  be  decisively  rejected.  The  cor- 
'esponding  term  in  Hebrew  is  DiJ"'!^,  the  strong 
or  powerful  ones:  Ex.  xv.  15;  Ezek.  xvii.  13 > 
2  Kings  xxiv.  1.5. — Verse  4.  Children  in 
whcm  was  no  blemish,  i.e.,  no  physical  fault ; 
bence.  of  faultless  beauty ;  compare  2  Sam. 
liv.  25.  (Cf.  the  form  -rs'a  in  the  Kethib  in 
this  place  with  Job  xxxi.  7.)  Corporeal  sound- 
ness and  a  handsome  form  were  considered  in- 
•lispensible  among  the  ancient  Orientals  (cf. 
Ourtius.  vi.  5,  29),  for  those  who  were  destined 
ifor  court  service, — a  view  which  is  still  shared 
»)y  the  Turks;  see  Ricaut   IJegcnitdrt.  Zustaiid 

lies  turk.  Rtklies,  i.  13. — The  indefinite  Q"'7f". 
does  not  admit  of  a  definite  conclusion  respect- 
tog  the  age  of  the  j'ouths,  and  particularly  of 
Daniel.  The  remark  in  Plato,  Alcib.  i.  g  37, 
.however,  according  to  which  the  training  of  the 
Persian  youth  by  the  -ai('in)uyn\  Sam'/.cim  began 
irith  the  14th  year,  has  a  certain  importance  for 
speculations  on  this  question,  which  is  enhanced 
Dy  the  statement  of  Xenophon,  Ci/n>j).  i.  2,  that 
Qone  of  the  io'/Jm  might  enter  the  service  of 
the  king  before  they  attained  their  17th  year. 
What  is  said  in  v.  5  concerning  a  period  of 
three  years  during  which  Daniel  was  in  training, 
corresponds  remarkably  with  these  statements. 
— bMlfuI  in  all  \risdom.  The  intellectual 
qualifications  are  immediately  connected  with 
the  physical.  Havemick,  Hitzig,  and  others, 
are  correct  in  taking  fi'SC??  in  the  sense  of 
"  discerning,  understanding,"  rather  than 
"versed,  or  experienced," — as  denoting  apti- 
tude rather  than  habitus.  "  mzZTl,  as  ^~  mdi- 
cates,  is  the  objective  wisdom,  which  is  dis- 
played in  the  various  fields  of  knowledge,  and, 
according  to  v.  17,  is  contained  in  books" 
(Hitzig) — hence  scientific,  as  distinguished  from 
the  purely  practical  wisdom,  which  elsewhere  is 
generally  referred  to. — Cunning  in  knov/ledge, 
and  understanding;  literally  "  knowing  know- 
ledge"     (tlJ~      ''f,'^.'')     and     "understanding 


thought"  (''7'?  TrD-  On  J"!)?  "thought" 
(elsewhere  "knowledge"),  compare  Eccles.  x. 
20,  and  on  both  phrases  compare  chap.  ii.  21  ; 
Neh.  X.  29. — And  such  as  had  ability  in  them 
to  stand  in  the  king's  palace,  literally  "who 
had  power  (Hs,  here  [perhaps]  abilUy,  talent  ; 
compare  viii.  7  ;  xi.  15)  to  stand  in  the  king's 
palace "  (^ban  i2^n2  -;>:_'':,— for  which  "i?.? 

n:  is  not  to  be  substituted^.  "  To  stand  in 
the  king's  palace  "  is  the  same  as  "to  stand  be- 
ford  the  king"  (cf.  Gen.  xviii.  8  ;  xli.  40  ;  Deut. 
i.  38,  etc.),  i.e.,  to  await  his  commands,  to  serve 
him.  See  below,  v.  17,  and  compare  the  absolute 
C^I^J"",  tlte  servant.^,  in  Zech.  iii.  7 ;  also  Esth. 
V.  2.  — And  whom  they  might  teach  the  learn- 
ing and  the  tongue  of  the  Chaldaeans ;  liter- 
ally, "and  to  teach  them  the  learning,"  etc. 
2~12,ri  depends  on  the  verb  I^S']  v.  3,  and 
is  co-ordinate  with  St'^ni  in  the  same  verse,  as 
the  preceding  athndch  indicates — --ied,  "writ- 
ing," does  not  in  this  place  denote  the  art 
of  writing,  but  the  learning  of  the  Chaldaeans ; 
compare  "lEB-^S  v.  17,  which  can  only  be  equi- 
valent to  aS  teor/w'7!^,  "all  literary  knowledge." 
Further,  f  ~C3  "ilTj  can  hardly  signify  the 
Aramaean  idiom  which  begins  with  chap.  ii.  4, 
but  designates  the  original  Chaldee,  which  was 
of  Japhetic  origin,  or  tinctured  with  Japhetic 
elements — as  Michaelis,  Bertholdt,  Winer,  Hii- 
vemick,  Lengerke,  Hengsteuberg,  and  others, 
hold.*  Tliat  the  noble  Jewish  youths  should 
be  compelled  to  learn  the  Aramsean  dialect, 
which,  according  to  2  Kings  xviii.  20  et  seq. 
(Isa.  xxxvi.  11).  was  the  oflScial  language  both  at 
the  Assyrian  and  the  Babylonian  courts,  admits, 
indeed,  of  an  easy  explanation ;  since  the  Jews 
of  that  time  were  but  slightly  acquainted  with 
that  dialect  (cf.  2  Kings,  in  the  above  mentioned 
place),  and  since  youth  especially,  of  whatever 
rank,  could  not  have  been  instructed  in  this 
language,  which  was  indeed  related  to  the 
Hebrew,  but  was  nevertheless  a  foreign  tongue. 
The  view  which  identifies  the  "  tongue  of  the 
Chaldaeans"  with  the  official  Aramsan  of  the 
court,  is  untenable  because  of  the  circumstance 
that  the  latter  is  introduced  in  chap.  ii.  4  by  the 
term  ~~?p~St  (cf.  Isa.  xxxvi.  11;  Ezra  iv.  7), 
and  is  thus  clearly  distinguished  from  the  ordi- 
nary language  of  the  C'l'^'S.  (See  notes  on 
that  passage,  and  compare  Introd.  §  1 ,  note  3. ) 
Verse  5.  The  prcmitioii  for  tlie  selected  youth, 
and  their  training.  And  the  king  appointed 
them  a  daily,  etc.  "Them,"  i.e.,  those  who 
should  be  selected,  but  whom  the  king  did  not 
yet  know.  n'Q,  to  ordain,  appoint,  a.':iiignare, 
compare  v.  10.— i'3'i''3  Bi^  131,  literally, 
"matter  of  the  day  in  its  day,"  i.e.,  a  daily 
sujyply,  or  ration.  Compare  Jer.  Iii,  34,  where 
the  same  expression  is  used  with  reference  to 
the  daily  food  of  the  captive  Jehoiachin  ;  also 
Ex.  V.  13,  19  ;  Lev.  xxiii  7,  etc.— Of  the  king's 
meat, — of  which,  according  to  Oriental  custom. 

♦[others,  however,  miiintaill  that  it  was  of  Hainitic  affia 
ity.  The  subject  of  the  origin  of  the  C^TTS  is  very  diJB 
cult.    See  the  note  u\  Keil  ad  loc.] 


GO 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


not  only  noble  guests  (cf.  Jer.  as  cited  above),  but 
also  all  the  servants  and  officials  were  accustomed 
to  partake,  compare  1  Kings  v.  2,  3  ;  and  con- 
cerning the  custom  in  question  at  the  Persian 
court,  see  Athenajus,  iv.  10,  p.  09;  Plutarch, 
frobl.  vii.  4. — ^^r?  "meat,"  really  delicacies, 
luxurious  food,  is  of  Persian  origin, — a  com- 
posite word  formed  out  cf  brig,  "  tribute  "  (cf. 
Sanscrit  b/uign,  "allowance,"  "ration"),  and 
the  preposition  paiti,  "towards,  to,"  (  =  Sans- 
crit })riiti,  Greek  irporl,  77/jor)— and  hence  is 
equivalent  to  "  apportioned  food,"  which  sense 
is  also  expressed  by  the  Sanscrit  pratiihaga, 
which  designates  the  daily  proportion  of  fruits, 
flowers,  etc.,  required  by  the  rajah  in  his  house- 
hold. Cf.  GUdemeister  in  the  Zeitschrift  fur 
Kunde  ffe«  Morgenl-andts.  iv.  214. — And  of  the 
wine  which  he  drank,  properly  "of  the  wine 
of  his  drinking,"  his  banquet.  I'P^'?  is  to  be 
taken  in  the  singular  in  this  place,  as  well  as  in 
vs.  8  and  10. — So  nourishing  them  three  years, 
rather,  "and  (commanded)  to  instruct  them 
three  years" — properly  "educate,"  "bring  up" 
[but  literally,  "  to  make  great  "—perhaps  refer- 
ring primarily  to  their  physical  culture] .  The 
infinitive  cb^3i^  with  a  copulative  i  certainly 
does  not  depend  on  "i^S'T  in  v.  3;  but  rather 
is  to  be  regarded  as  governed  by  ^1?'p.,  from 
whose  signification  the  idea  of  commandiyig, 
(rrdaining,  is  zeugmatically  derived.  Compare 
~}n  in  V.  11;  also  Jonah  ii.  1.— That  at  the 
end  thereof  they  might  stand  before  the  king, 
i.e.,  after  the  three  years  had  expired.  "To 
stand  before  the  king"  is  "to  serve  him,"  cf.  v. 
3.  ['•  SUindiiig  was  the  position  of  waiters  in 
readiness  to  do  their  master's  wUl." — Stvart.] 

Verses  6,  7.  T/ie  names  of  Danid  and  his 
associates,  and  their  changing. — Now  among 
these  we:  e  of  the  children  of  Judah,  hence, 
belonging  to  the  most  prominent  tribe,  after 
which  the  entire  nation  was  usually  called,  even 
at  that  early  period.  The  four  youths  are  here 
shown  to  be  Jewish  =^^ri~Q  (v.  3) ;  but  it  does 
not  follow  from  this  passage  that  all  of  them, 
and  Daniel  in  particular,  were,  in  addition,  of 
royal  family  (n:^;^-  :?-ira.  V.  3).*  The  royal 
descent  of  Daniel  can  only  be  conjectured;  that 
Zedekiah  was  his  father,  as  is  stated  by  Jose- 
phus,  is  a  mere  supposition.  Compare  Introd.  g 
2,  where  the  names  Daniel,  Hananiah,  Mishael, 
and  Azariah  have  been  sufficiently  considered 
(cf .  also  not.-  1  to  that  g).  Verse  7.  Unto  whom 
the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  gave  (other)  names, 
rather,  "  and  the  prince  .  .  .  gave  them."  The 
changing  of  names  as  a  sign  of  entrance  into 
the  condition  of  subjection  to  a  ruler,  is  a  fre- 
quently attested  custom  of  Oriental  and  classical 
antiquity.  Compare  Gen.  xli.  45  (Joseph);  2 
Kings  xxiii.  34  (Eliakim);  2  Kings  xxiv.  17 
(Matthaniah = Zedekiah);  the  re-naming  of  pupils 


•[Mnch  IcBs  does  it  follow  "  that  the  other  youths  of  noble 
descent,  who  had  been  carried  nwiiy  along  with  them,  be- 
longed to  other  tribes"  (Keil  ad  loc.),  for  ras  the  some  com- 
mentator immediately  adds ).  "the  names  of  Daniel  and  his 
three  companions  only  are  mentioned,  because  their  history 
recorded  in  this  book  brings  them  specially  under  our 
not  ice.'l 


by  their  preceptors,  e.g.,  2  Sam.  xii.  25  (Solo 
mon  =  Jedediah);  Mark  iii  16  ( Simon  =  Peter) ; 
and  respecting  this  custom  among  the  Greelu 
and  Romans,  Theodoret,  on  our  passage ;  Chry- 
sostom,  0pp.  V.  286,  etc.  ["But  whUe  the 
kings  referred  to  only  had  their  paternal  names 
changed  for  other  Israelitish  names,  which  were 
given  them  by  their  conquerors.  Daniel  and  his 
friends  received  genuine  heathen  names  in  ex- 
change for  their  own  significant  names,  which 
were  associated  with  that  of  the  true  God." — 
Keil.\  For  he  gave  unto  Daniel  the  name  of 
BelteshazzEr,  etc.  ;  rather,  "  and  he  called 
Daniel  Belteshazzar."  The  four  new  names  of 
the  youths  doubtless  contain,  without  excep- 
tion, a  reference  to  the  divinities  of  Babylon. 
This  is  apparent  in  the  name  "i?**!?^??  ('^f* 
chap.  iv.  5), — with  which  the  royal  name 
ISXC'ba  is  probably  identical— whether,  as  a 
majority  hold,  we  find  the  name  of  the  god  ;a 
in  it,  and  explain  its  composition  perhaps  by 
Beli  princeps  (which  the  expression  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar himself  in  chap.  iv.  5  seems  to 
endorse),  or  prefer  Hitzig's  more  artificial  in- 
terpretation =:P«W  tscMcara,  "  nourisher  and 
devourer,"  i^;  "25  likewise  (for  which  the 
scriptio  plena,  chap,  iii,  29,  is  S«i3:  5)  is  cer- 
tainly equivalent  to  "adorer  of  Nego,"  which 
divinity  is  probably  not  the  same  as  Nebo  ( Saadia, 
Hitz.,  Kranichf.,  and  others),  but  a  reptile  god, 
and  perhaps  the  familiar  dragon  of  the  apocryphal 
book  Bel  and  the  Dragon — since  the  comparison  of 
the  Sanscrit  naga,  serpent,  with  this  name, 
which  was  first  essayed  by  Rodiger,  affords  a 
more  likely  conception  than  the  transmutation 
of  2  into  3.  But  '^^"r\  which  may  be  identical 
with  "^^in,  Zech.  ix.  1  (cf.  Kohler,  Sachnria,  2d 
pt,  p.  18)  also  seems  to  designate  a  divinity,  and 
possibly,  in  case  it  is  based  on  the  root  -nn  or 
-ITn,  "to  move  in  a  circle,"  the  sun-god.  "r""2 
may  be  the  same  as  the  Sanscrit  meschach, 
"  stag,"  and  therefore  denote  a  god  likewise 
belonging  to  the  siderial  domain ;  whether  th« 
sun-god  be  again  intended,  as  Hitzig  supposes, 
must  remain  doubtful  (but  see  Hitzig  on  this 
place). 

Verses  8-10.  Daniel's  request,  and  the  refusal 
of  the  master  of  the  eunuchs  to  entertain  it.  But 
Daniel  purposed  in  his  heart.  So  the  A.  V 
and  Luther,  Uterally,  but  less  agreeable  to  the 
sense  of  13"?  3?  ^'r-'l  than  "  he  was  con- 
cerned," as  Bertholdt  properly  renders  it.  That 
he  would  (better  "should  ")  not  defile  himself 
with  the  king's  meat.  The  Sept.  renders 
5tOr"  sb  "ICS  by  o-^rur  M  n>ia:riin/;  cf. 
a'Ain}rifiaTa,  Acts  XV.  20.  The  reason  for  the 
refusal  of  the  Jirc,  i-^-,  the  ordinary  food  of 
the  king,  as  weU  as  of  the  wine  from  his  table 
(cf.  v.  5),  by  Daniel  and  his  associates,  arose 
doubtless  from  the  heathenish  custom  of  conse- 
crating each  meal,  by  offermg  a  portion  to  the 
gods.*     In  order  to  prevent  their  being  involved 

•[That  the  special  reason  for  their  abstinence  was  not 
the  Levitical  distinction  of  "clean"  and  "unclean" 
animals,  is  evident  from  their  rejection  of  the  wme  like- 
wise  which  the  Mosaic  law  allowed.  In  addition  to  thf 
reason  assigned  by  our  author,  we  suspect  some  samtarj 


CHAP.  I.  1-21. 


GI 


in  idolatry  by  partaking  of  food  which  had  been 
thus  dedicated  to  the  gods  (cf .  1  Cor.  x.  18-20), 
they   avoided    especially   those   kinds   of    food 
which  were  commonly  oifered  to  the  gods,  hence 
those  piepared  from  llesh,  wine,  or  flour.     The 
Tegetables,    such    as   pulse,    cabbage,    etc.,    of 
which  alone  they  were  willing  to  partake,  were 
indeed  also  prejjared  by  the  heathen  cooks  of 
the  king,  and  were  even  unclean  in  themselves, 
as  having  been  grown  on  heathen  soil  (Am.  vii. 
17  ;   Hos.  ix.  9,  4);   but,  since  oflferings  or  liba- 
tions were  never  taken  from  them,  they  were 
not   specially   sacred  to  the  gods,   and  hence, 
might   be    used   by   pious    Jews,    without   any 
essential   defilement  of   conscience,       Compare 
Havemick   and    Hitzig    on    this   passage,    and 
against  Vou  Lengerke  especially,  who  thought 
to  find  here  the  v",""''"''/."  'pooii,  2  Maec.  v.  27 ; 
and,  therefore,    a  proof  of  the  composition  of 
the   book  in   the   time  of  the  Maccabees ;  see 
Havemick.  JV'ti/c  krit.  Unters.,  p.  47.      ["Dan- 
iel's resolution  to  refrain  from  such  unclean  food 
flowed  from  fidelity  to  the  law,  and  from  stead- 
fastness  to  the   faith  that  •  man  liveth  not  by  ' 
bread  only,  but  by  every  word  that  proceedeth 
out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord'  (Deut.  viii.  3)." 
— Kril]       Verse   9.    Now   God   had   brougijt 
Daniel  into  iavor  and   tender  love  with  the 
prince  of  the   eunuchs;    literally,    "and   God  ! 
gave  into  favor  .    .    .   before  the   prince,"  etc.  ; 
~~~i   '~:   is  exactly  the  Greek  hSuwi'  ti,-  t'/'o- 
Kru  "cvn.iuor  (Theodot. ).  On  this  subject  compare 
Gen.  xxxLX.  21  ;  also  Xeh.  i.  1 1  ;  1  Kings  viii.  50. 
— Versa  10.  I  fear  my  lord,  the  king,  etc.    The 
prina?  of  the  eunuchs  does  not,  in  these  words, 
positively  refuse  the  favor  which  Daniel  seeks, 
but  intimates  that  in  order  to  avoid  the  royal 
displeasure,   he  must  render  at  lea.st  a  formal 
and  apparent  obedience  to  the  command  he  had 
received  ;  aside  from  this,  he  shows  his  readi-  1 
ness    to    exercise    every    possible    forbearance  j 
towards  his  wards.     The  remark  in  verse  9  that 
God  had  brought  Daniel  into  the  favor  of  the 
prince   is,    therefore,   by  no  means  in    conflict 
with  the  tenor  of  this  reply. — For  why  should 
he  see,  etc.     The  .same  turn  as  in  Cant.   i.  7,  i 
where     the     poetical    ~"^'r     stands    for    Ti"S« 
'"''??,   and    where,   similarly,   the    question   ex- 
presses the  sense  of  an  emphatic  negation  (cf. 
2  Chron.   xxxii.  4;    Ezra  vii.   23). — Your   faces 
worse  liking,  etc.     -"?".T,  properly  "««(/,  low- 
ering, of  a  peevish  appearance  "  (Gen.  xl.  G  ;   cf. 
^"??.  xl.  7),  here  implying  a  meager  and  decayed 
appearance,  exactly  like  the  Greek  mi'^puTrd,-, 
Matt.  vi.  IG.      ['■  ^;B  is  to  be  understood  before 
3'""'''.  according  to  the  compnratio  decnrtata 
frequently  found   in   Hebrew ;    cf.    Psa.   iv.   8 ; 
xviii.  34.   etc."— A'( (•;.]— Then  shall  ye  make 
me  endanger  my  head  to  the  king  j    properly, 
"  and  ye  shall  endanger."    sr^^rr;  [and ye  cause 
(<■' f<J>'fr'if-  a  Chaldaizing  Piel  from;:|n],  is  co- 
ordinated  with  ~?<"':''.,    and  like   it   depends  on 

~"^  ""'t-'?^  ;  therefore:  "for  why  should  he 
aee  .  .  .  and  ye  endanger  my  head,"  etc.     On 

cause,  ar:.^ing  fr.-ni  an  ap!>rehensinn  of  the  stimulating 
effect  of  the  highh-seasoned  fooil,  especially  if  they  were 
imdcr  surgical  treatment.) 


the  phrase  "  to  endanger  the  head,"  compare 
Iliad,  iv.  162,  a~nr}oai  g'w  KKpa'Af]^  and  the  Ger- 
man, ^'den  Kopf  iienrirkeii." 

Verses  11-lG.  Danitfs  abstemiouxness,  and  iU 
consequences.     Then   said  Daniel   to  Melzar. 
"^?r?~,  as  the  prefixed  article  shjws,  is  not  a 
proper  name,  but  an  appellative,  and  probably 
designates  an  official.     It  can,  however,  scarcely 
mean  a  pedagogue  or  president  of  alumni,  as 
Hitzig    suggests,    but    rather    a    "butler"    or 
"steward,"  as  appears  from  the  nearly  identical 
Persian  mekor,   "vini  princeps"  (according  to 
Haug  a  compound  word  from  the  Zend,  madhu 
=u{tiv^    "drink,"   and   fara^^Kapa,    "head"); 
compare    aiJ,\iriyiii/.nor,    John    ii.    8,    9), — [and 
npcri,  Isa,  xxxvi.   2].     Verse  12.   Prove  thy 
servants,   I    beseech    thee,   ten   days.      The 
number  ten,  which  was  constantly  employed  as 
a    round  number  (ci.  verse  20;  Zech.   viii.   23; 
2  Kings  XX.  8,  et  seq. ;  and  generally  my  I'heo- 
logia  NaturalU^  i.  713  et  seq.),  was  the  more 
suitable   in   this   case,    as  it   was    "  sufiiciently 
large  to  leave  traces  of  the  change  of  food  in 
the  appearance  of  the  young  men,  yet  not  too 
great  for  a  mere  experiment"  (Hitzig). — Give 
us  (only)  pulse  to  eat.     Concerning  CsSt,  tege- 
tables,  pulse,  see  on  verse  8. — Verse  13.  And  as 
thou  seest,  deal  with  thy  servants;   i.e.,  ac- 
cording to  the  result  of  thy  observations.     On 
rs^ri  with  ?.s«>e,  see  Ewald,  Lehrbiich,  %  224,  c. 
— Verse  15.  Fatter  in  flesh.     The  youth  them- 
selves, and  not  merely  their  faces,  are  the  sub- 
jects  of   this   predicate;    for   neither   Sri'HI': 
nor  13"'»-i'3  can  be  regarded  as  plurals.     The 
plural  5i»n>2  can  nowhere  be  poiuted  out,  and 
finds  no  support  in  Ecc.  xi.  9  (cf.  the  exegetical 
notes  on  that  passage,   and  also  Hiivemick   on 
Daniel,  p.   30). — Verse   1(5.   Thus  Melzar  took 
away  the  portion  of  their  meat,  and  the  wine 
that   they   drank;    better,    '-and  the  steward 
(henceforth)   took   away   their   appointed   food 
and  wine.'      '^^''^.  is  "not  introductory,   but  in 
connection    with    the   participle    expresses   the 
duration"  (Hitzig).     The  continuation  of  their 
treatment  on  this   wise  by  the  steward   is   re- 
marked in  order  that  the  improvement  in  the 
condition   of  the  youth,   already  mentioned  as 
apparent  in  verse   15,  may  be  more   strikingly 
brought   out.— On   the   question    whether    the 
narrative  aims  to  represent  this  fact  as  miracu- 
hua,  as  well  as  concerning  its  ethical  importance, 
see  the  dogmatico-ethical  considerations  [below]. 
Verse  17.    The  great  endowments  of  Danid  and 
his  companions. — As   for  these  four  children, 
God   gave  them  knowledge   and   skill,  etc.  ; 
properly,  "And  God  gave  .  .   .     to  these  four,'' 
etc.       Luther's   rendering,    "And   the    God   of 
these  four  gave  them,"  is  inexact.     On  the  pre- 
cedence of  the  remote  object  in  the  nominative, 
followed   by  a  personal  pronoun  in  the  dative 
(here  onb),  compare  the  examples  adduced  by 
Ewald,   §  309,   a,  b.— In  all  learning  and  wis- 
dom.— 1E0,  as  in  verse  4,  "  literary  knowledge, 
acquaintance  with  literature,  erudition"  (Theo- 
dotion,  ypaunnriK)/). — And  Daniel  had  imder- 
standing  in  all  visions  and  dreams.     It  was. 


62 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


therefore,  his  acquaintance  with  oneirocritics 
that  disting-uished  him  above  his  companions, 
who  must  also  be  regarded  as  wise  and  highly 
cultured.  This  was  clearly  a  miraculous  gift, 
which  was  intimately  connected  with  his  X"!""/^" 
iTi«i0iiTthvi\  but  must  not  be  confounded  with  it ; 
for  the  skill  to  interpret  the  dreams  and  visions 
of  others,  is  certainly  different  from  the  gift  of 
seeing  prophetical  dreams  and  visions  in  person. 
Still,  as  the  second  half  of  the  book  shows,  the 
possession  of  the  latter  faculty  by  our  prophet 
presumed  the  existence  of  the  former  ;  just  as 
in  the  New  Testament  the  divinely-bestowed 
power  to  interpret  tongues  and  prove  spirits 
goes  hand  in  hand  with  the  power  to  speak  in 
tongues  and  prophesy,  in  the  case  of  the  truly 
great  bearers  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  e.g.,  St.  Paul 
(1  Cor.  xiv.  6  et  seq.),  St.  Peter  (Acts  v.  3;  viii. 
20;  X.  10,  etc.).— liTn-ira  1^:n  is  the  same 
construction  as  in  verse  4  :  n?3rn";33  D^i^3— Oi 
compare  Ewald,  §  217,  2.  ;■;,  however,  does 
not  belong  only  to  liT~,  but  also  to  "iabri] 
following.  "All  visions  and  dreams"  are  all 
possible  ones,  of  every  imaginable  kind. 

Verses  18-20.  Favorable  issue  of  their  ex- 
amination before  the  king.  Now  at  the  end  of 
the  days.  Von  Lengerke's  rendering,  "  and 
toward  the  end  of  the  time,"  is  incorrect. — 
^'*^?~?,  "to  bring  them,"  viz.:  into  the  pres- 
ence of  the  king.  Hence  not  the  same  as  »^n~ 
in  verse  3.— The  prince  .  .  .  brought  them  in 
before  Nebuchadnezzar.  Tliem—uot  merely 
the  four  (verse  17),  but,  as  may  be  inferred 
from  ver.  I'J,  all  those  Israelitish  youths,  verse 
1  o.  —  And  among  them  aU  was  none  found  like 
Daniel,  etc.,  either  in  physical  beauty,  or  in 
marked  mental  excellencies. — Therefore  stood 
they  before  th3  king,  i.e.,  they  became  his 
servants.  "  T?"  is  inceptive  ;  they  entered  the 
royal  service,  and  continued  in  it  afterwards " 
(Hitzig). — Verse  20.  And  in  all  matters  of 
wisdom  and  understanding;  literally,  "the 
discernment  of  wisdom"  (~;'3  ~'?t";  some- 
thing like  CBCK)  rpn,  Num.  xxvii.  11 ;  cf.  Psa. 
Iv.  24).  "'p^n.  however,  is  here,  as  in  verse  4, 
employed  exclusively  in  the  sense  of  objective 
irist/om,  which  is  essenti.ally  the  same  as  science  ; 
while  ~:''3  is  "  the  subjective  interior  of  this 
wi.sdom,  the  mind  which  shines  through  it." 
^9"  is  here  equivalent  to  a  special  point,  matter, 
object ;  cf.  Psa.  xxxi.  0 ;  Judg.  xix.  24 ;  Jer. 
xliv.  4,  etc. — That  the  king  inquired  of  them. 
-13.3,  not  '^■J3.^"'.  The  perfect  refers  hack  to 
the  examination  instituted  by  the  king,  verse 
19,  not  forward  to  later  questions,  which  he 
addressed  to  them. — Found  them  ten  times 
better.  Compare  Gen.  xxxi.  7,  41  ;  Lev.  xxvi. 
2<i;  Zech.  viii.  23;  Ecc.  vii.  19. — Tnan  all  the 
magicians  and  astrologers  that  -were  in  all  his 
realm;  rather,  "than  all  the  learned  (in  litera- 
cure)  magicians  that  were,"  etc.  C^:3r"}n,  by 
reai-on  of  the  probable  derivation  of  the  word 
from  "7"?,  stylus,  represents  those  who  are 
Tersed  ra  writings,  scribes  (scarcely  persons  who 


are  clever,  discerning,  as  Hitzig  prefers,  becaus* 
of  its  assumed  derivation  from  the  Zend 
khratuinat,  the  Rabbinical  Tpcnip).  The 
learned  Egyptian  priests  were  designated  by 
this  term  (Gen.  xh.  8,  24;  Ex.  vii.  11,  22, 
etc.),  while  Herodotus  (ii.  30)  calls  them 
lepoy/iau/iareic,  and  the  Sept.  sometimes  terms 
them  ifr/yt/Tal  (Gen.  xli.  8,  24),  and  again 
oixpiarai  (Ex.  vii.  11).  Unlike  chap.  ii.  2,  27  ;  iv. 
4,  etc. ,  where  the  Chartummim  are  mentioned 
as  a  special  class  beside  the  Ashaphim  nnd  other 
wise  men,  tlie  word,  though  not  connected  with 
the  following,  serves  in  this  place  merely  to  en- 
large the  conceptif.a  of  the  predicate.  C^C  i2!«,  the 
more  special  term  designates  (in  virtue  of  the 
undeniable  samentss  in  sense  of  its  root  njj 
with  cisi:;  and  C|"i':)  "breathers,  whisperers," 
i.e.,  conjurers,  who  murmured  their  magic 
formulas  in  an  aspirated  whisper.  Whether 
they  are  to  be  specially  regarded  as  "snake- 
charmers  "  must  remain  undecided,  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  the  relation  of  this  word  to  the 
term  iin-i-  is  not  established,  and  is  possibly  no 
more  than  an  accidental  similarity  in  sound. 
Compare,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Arabic 
naplmtha,  "to  breathe  mysteriously  on  coiled 
knots"  (Freytag,  Lexic.  Arab.  s.  v.). 

Verse  21.  Preliminary  conclusion  of  the  intro- 
duction. And  Daniel  continued  (thus)  even 
unto  the  first  year  of  king  Cyrus.  ~"~,  which 
is  neither  to  be  identified  with,  nor  exchanged 
for  rr^n  (the  latter  is  advocated  by  Kirmss  and 
Hitzig  among  others,  who  substitute  ''^y_  for 
"''??'').  expresses,  in  connection  with  "5,  the 
sense  of  attaining  to.  or  of  existing  until  the  in- 
auguration of  an  event.  But  "  to  live  until  the 
first  year  of  the  reign  of  Cyrus  "  is  by  no  means 
equivalent  to  dying  in  that  year.  In  this  case 
the  passage  would  contradict  the  statement 
found  in  chap.  x.  1,  and,  therefore,  would  be  in 
evidence  against  the  original  unity  of  this  book 
(compare  Introd.  g  4).  It  is  clear  that  the  par- 
ticle Tj;  in  this  place  does  not  refer  to  the  close 
of  the  prophet's  life,  but  simply  designates  a 
highly  important  period  of  time,  up  to  which  he 
lived  and  approved  himself  as  the  possessor  of 
the  exalted  gifts  of  wisdom,  prophecy,  and  in- 
terpreting dreams  (verse  17).  The  special 
mention  of  the  first  year  of  Cyrus  as  such  a 
period,  "  ha.s,  on  the  one  hand,  the  objective 
reason  that  a  really  new  a;ra,  for  the  Jews 
especially,  and  one  to  which  the  most  remark- 
able prophecies  (Isa.  xliv.  28;  xlv.  1)  referred, 
began  with  him  ;  and,  on  the  other,  the  subjec- 
tive reason,  that  this  sharp  separation  into  great 
historical  periods  is  general  in  Daniel,  and,  in 
addition,  that  a  longing  for  the  deliverance  of 
his  people  must  be  regarded  as  a  controlling  dis- 
position of  his  nature  "  (Hiivernick).  Compare 
Hengstenberg  (Beitr.,  p.  65,  314  et  seq.),  and 
Maurer  on  this  passage,  who  regards  "?  """11' 
etc.,  correctly,  as  simply  .showing  that  Daniel 
lived  through  the  whole  period  of  the  exile  aa 
a  highly  esteemed  wise  man  at  the  Chaldajan 
court.*     We  need  not,  however,  adopt  Ewald'e 

*[*'  Compjire  the  analogous  statement,  Jer.  i.  2etseq,,  that 
Jcrem.ah  pruphcbieU  iu  the  days  of  Jos'ab  and  Jchoiakljx. 


CHAP.  1.   1-21. 


63 


view,  who  assumes  that  the  words  ~?^n  "l^ra 
have  beon  lost  after  ;j{"':~  ;  "Thus  Daniel  lived 
at  the  royal  court  until,"  etc..  with  which  he 
connects  the  ventviresome  hypothesis  that  Dan- 
iel and  his  companions  dwelt  in  a  separate 
building  of  the  palace,  which  was  sjiecially 
intended  to  serve  as  "  the  royal  academy  (!)." — 
The  Hebrew  form  of  the  name  ™^13  evidently 
corresponds  better  with  the  ancient  Persian  in 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  (Qufun,  Quriis),  than 
the  Greek  Krfm-.  Its  interpretation  by  "sun," 
which  is  found  as  early  as  Ctesias  (Plut.  Artax. 
i.  p.  1012)  and  in  the  Etyaot  M.  (cf.  the  San- 
scrit ««/•«,  surja  ;  Zend  hrare;  modem  Persian 
khur).  is  not  entirely  certain.  See  the  ZeiUchrift 
far  Kujuk  des  Morgeid.  vi  153  et  seq. ;  350 
ct  seq. 

ETHICAL  DEDUCTIONS  CONNECTED  WITH  THE 
SCHEME  OF  REDEMPTION,  .\POLOGETICAL 
REMARKS,   AND   HOMILETICAL  HINTS. 

1.  The  dogmatic  and  ethical  significance  of 
the  early  history  of  Daniel  and  his  companions 
consists  chiefly,  and  it  may  even  be  said  ex- 
clusively, in  the  proof  of  resolute  faith  and 
obedient  devotion  to  God,  which  they  displayed 
by  abstaining  from  the  ro.val  provision  at  the 
Babylonian  court.  Our  admiration  is  not  en- 
listed in  behalf  of  the  abstinent  diet,  the  fast- 
ing, the  mortification  of  self,  on  the  part  of  these 
youth,  but  finds  something  grand  and  morally 
important  in  the  active  trust  in  God,  and  the 
faithful  obedience  to  God,  that  are  displayed  in 
those  self-denials.  They  did  not  abstain  from 
the  use  of  the  delicacies  of  the  royal  table,  dur- 
ing the  whole  period  of  their  training,  from  a 
spirit  of  desperate  ascetic  bravado,  or  because  of 
a  super-legal  dread  of  God's  creatures,  which, 
in  themselves,  are  not  objectionable  (1  Tim.  iv. 
4) ;  nor  yet  because,  like  the  Buddhists  of  India, 
the.v  scrupled  to  destroy  animal  life  in  any  form ; 
but  from  the  truly  religious  motive  of  remain- 
ing faithful  and  devoted  to  their  covenant  God 
Jehov.ih  (see  above,  ver.se  8i.  and  to  avoid  their 
being  implicated,  to  any  degree  whatever,  in  the 
idolatrous  practices  of  their  heathen  masters. 
Their  iib.stemiousne.ss  has,  therefore,  essentially 
the  same  ethical  value  as  that  of  the  Rechabites, 
who  refused  to  drink  \vine.  from  motives  of  reli- 
gious obedience  to  the  vow  of  their  ancestor  iJer. 
XXXV.);  or.  as  the  conscientious  abiding  of  the 
Nazarite  by  his  sacred  vow.  which  imposed 
similar  denials  on  him.  and  which  might  cover 
the  whole  period  of  life  (Samson,  John  the  Bap- 
tist), or  a  definite  time  of  longer  or  shorter 
duration  (St.  Paul,  Acts  xxi.  24  et  seq.  ;  Aquila, 
Acts  xviii.  18).  A  further  analogy  to  the  course 
of  these  youth  in  Babylon  will  be  found  in  the 
case  of  the  Jew^  at  Rome,  whom  Flavins  Jose- 
phus  mentions  in  chap.  3  of  his  autobiography. 
Our  wonder  and  em^ilation  are  not  excited  in 
any  of  these  instances  by  the  avoiding  of  certain 
indulgences,  but  rather,  b.v  the  disposition  of 
faithful  submission  to  the  wholesome  discipline 
of  God.  This  it  is,  that  marks  their  course  as 
the  effect  of  a  strong,  rather  than  weak  faith, 

to  the  end  of  tiio  eleventh  yeiir  of  Zedekiah,  although  his 
book  contains  prophecies  also  ^f  a  date  subsequent  to  the 
taking  of  Jerufialei  „" — Ktil.} 


which  thus  becomes  an  example  for  the  Chris- 
tians of  all  ages.  Several  of  the  older  expositors 
already  recognized  this,  on  tlie  whole,  although 
their  extravagant  estimate  of  the  value  of  ascetic 
self-denial  of  any  sort,  prevented  them  from 
reaching  a  really  unprejudiced  and  truly  evan 
gelical  conclusion  upon  the  subject.  On  the 
request  of  Daniel  to  Melzar,  verse  12,  to  prove 
him  and  his  companions  during  ten  days  with 
pulse  and  water,  Jerome  remarks,  that  it  was  a 
striking  evidence  of  his  faith:  " In^eredibilii 
fldei  magnitudo  non  sdum  sibi  corpulentiam 
poUiceri  esu  vUioris  dbi,  sed  et  tempiis  statuere. 
Non  est  ergo  temeritath,  sed  fidei,  ob  quam 
regtas  dopes  contempserat."  Similarly  Theo- 
doret  on  that  passage  :  Ovdev  ry'  fi^  ^edv'Tzicrsui^ 
iCX^'pOTEpov^  Kui  6f^  TovTo  TroX}^axo^^v  Kal  aAAa;^;(ii?rw 
f(Trt  jUrti^fiv,  oiix  fjKiGTa  dh  kol  en  tuv  tov  •&£/j:r£<riob 
^avti/7.  pr/fidruv  to  yap  Trcarevaat  rs  koI  ^ap'p7,aat^ 
u~    "7/r    ^€ia~   p0777/~  aTzoAnvG^Tat^    Kal  fiij  kc-diui' 

ev-p€—taT£po~  Kal  TrepiKa/./Jcrepo'  tpavrjacrai 

Kal  pflsuv  ttoItjv  fvGef^Eia~  v:TepSo?-r/T  KaraXeirrEi, — 
Among  later  writers,  see  especially  Melancthon, 
who  remarks  correctly  :  "  Danielis  temperentiam 
fuisse  opus  coitfessionis,  et  quidcm  hanc  absti- 
nentiiim  pr<eceptnmfuissc  lege  Dei,  non  humnnii 
traditioiiibus.  Ergo  abstinebat  JJaniel,  lit  tes- 
tnretnr  se  non  abjicere  doctrlnnm,  in  qua  sola 
exstabat  verbum  Dei,  et  ahhorrere  ab  alia- 
rum  gentium  traditionibus  ;  "  also  Calvin,  who 
remarks  on  the  words  of  Daniel,  verse  11  et 
seq.  :  "'  Tenendum  est  etiom  iUud,  nempe  non 
lemere,  riequ-e  proprio  motu  hire  di^dsse,  seti 
instincUi  ipiritus  Sancti.  Fuixset  enim  non 
solertin,  sed  temeritas,  si  Daniel  siM  fabricasset 
hoc  wiisilium,  et  non  fuisset  certior  f actus  a 
Domine  defelici  evenlu  Xon.  est  igitur  dubium, 
quia  hoc  Imbuerit  ex  arcana  reeelatione,  fdiciter 
et  ex  roto  eessurum,  si  permitteret  minister 
ipsum  et  socios  read  leguminibus."  And  fur- 
ther: ^' Sciamui,  hoc  esse  verum  experimenlam 
finigalitatis  et  temperentit,  si  possimus  esurire, 
ubi  Deus  nos  ad  inerpiom  et  egestatem  crtgit, 
immo  etinm  si  sponte  possvmus  abjicere  delifias, 
qutf  nobis  essent  ad  mannm,  sed  nostro  exitio. 
Nam  hie  subsistere  in  leguminibus  et  aqua  esset 
valde  frivolum,  quia  major  interdum  in  em- 
perentia  se  prodit  in  leguminibus.  quam  in 
optimis  quibusque  et  lautissimis  dbis."  Note 
further,  what  Chr.  B.  Michaelis  says  con- 
cerning the  contrast,  indicated  in  verse  13, 
between  the  majority  of  the  youth  designed  to 
be  pages  to  the  king,  who  partook  unhesitat- 
ingly of  the  prescribed  fare,  and  the  strict 
abstinence  of  Daniel  and  his  three  friends  :  "'  Hi 
ergo,  licet  et  ipsi  Judeei  essent  (verses  3,  4,  6), 
tamen  in  observanda  lege  dieina  minus  religiosi 
fuerunt.  Tanto  laitdibilior  fnit  Danielis  socio- 
rumque  ejus  pietag  et  in  patria  rdigione  con- 
stantia." 

2.  The  course  of  the  self-denying  youth  will 
also  appear  as  an  effect  of  faith,  from  what  is  said 
in  verse  15  respecting  their  surprisingly  robust 
and  handsome  appearance.  Whether  this  con- 
sequence of  their  vegetable  diet  is  to  be  regarded 
as  something  miraculous,  or  as  a  purely  natural 
result,  may  be  questioned.  The  phenomenor. 
cm  hardl.v  pass  for  absolutely  miraculous ;  for 
the  traveler  Chardin,  in  a  manuscript  remark 
on  that  verse,  observes,  "  1  have  noticed  that  the 
Kechichs  (i.e.,  monks)  have  Ijy  far  a  fresher  and 
more  healthful  color  than  others,  and  that  the  Ar- 


bi 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


menians  and  Greeks,  though  they  frequently  fast, 
appear  healthy,  lively,  and  handsome "  (com- 
pare Bunler.  in  RosenmuUer's  Alt-  u.  Xmi-Mor- 
gerdiind,  iv.  340 ;  also  Banner,  Observations  in 
the  East.  i.  357 ) ;  and  it  is  conceivable  that  an 
unrestrained  indulgence  in  luxurious  food  might 
rather  detract  from  the  beauty  of  the  remaining 
youths,  than  enhance  it,  especially  if  it  were 
accompanied  by  the  debaucheries  and  excesses 
which  are  so  common  among  the  pages  at 
Oriental  courts  (Liidecke,  Bexchreibiing  des 
iiiyk.  Reichs.  i.  52  et  seq. ;  Hiivemick,  Koonment., 
p.  37).  Still,  there  is  something  extraordinary, 
indicative  of  Divinely  supernatural  co-operation, 
in  the  fact  that  at  the  end  of  three  years  the  ap- 
pearance of  Daniel  and  his  companions  excelled 
that  of  all  the  other  youths  in  fullness  and 
beauty,  and  not  less  in  the  additional  fact  that 
they  excelled  these  latter  in  point  of  intellectual 
qualities  and  scientific  acquirements.  Cf. 
Hiivernick.  ' '  At  the  same  time,  it  would  be  par- 
tial to  ignore  the  Divine  assistance ;  it  was  God 
who  enabled  his  servants  to  find  favor  with  their 
overseer,  who  gave  them  progress  in  Divine 
wisdom  and  under.standing,  and  who  did  not 
forsake  them  in  this  instance.  Only  by  this 
reference  to  God,  which  is  certainly  found  in 
our  narrative,  can  the  believer  comprehend  its 
true  bearing.  Hence  it  is  unwise,  and  the  mark 
of  a  merely  carnal  exposition,  to  become  in- 
volved in  far-fetched  and  physiological  explana- 
tions and  calculations,  such  as  are  found  in 
Aben-Ezra,  no  less  than  to  ignore  the  Higher 
power,  from  which  come  all  good  and  perfect 
gifts." 

3.  As  an  iipologetic'd  question  of  some  impor- 
tance, it  must  be  remarked  that  what  is  related 
in  this  chapter  concerning  the  abstinence  and 
strict  observance  of  the  law  at  the  heathen  court 
of  the  Chaldajan  king,  by  Daniel  and  his  associ- 
ates, is  but  poorly  adapted  to  stamp  the  narrative 
.as  a  fiction  of  Asmonaian  times,  in  which  the 
author  seeks  to  beget  trust  in  God  on  the  part 
of  his  readers  (Hitzig),  or  to  warn  them  against 
partaking  of  unclean  food  (Bertholdt.  Von  Len- 
gercke.  etc.).  The  pious  Jews  of  the  MaccabEean 
period  not  only  scrupulously  avoided  the  flesh 
which  was  sacrificed  to  idols  by  their  heathen 
oppressors,  but  everything  that  emanated  from 
them,  even  to  their  arts  and  sciences.  Daniel, 
Hananiah.  etc..  are.  on  the  contrarj-,  represented 
as  "distinguished  adepts  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the 
Chaldajans.  and  at  the  same  time,  as  filling 
ofticial  stations  at  the  court  of  the  Babylonian 


king,  or  even  as  members  of  the  order  of  tha 

magi  (cf.  chap.  ii.  13,  48  et  seq.).  But  while 
this  latter  feature  shows  a  striking  resemblance 
between  the  experience  of  the  leading  character 
and  that  of  Joseph  in  Egypt ;  while  especially 
the  patronage  of  the  youth  Daniel  by  the  prince 
of  the  eunuchs,  as  well  as  his  high  endowment  aa 
an  interi)reter  of  dreams,  reminds  us  strongly  of 
Joseph ;  we  are  yet  compelled  to  reject  the 
opinion  that  the  whole  is  merely  an  artificial 
copy  of  the  early  history  of  that  patriarch, 
because  nothing  is  recorded,  either  of  an  ascetic 
refusal  of  food  or  drink  on  the  part  of  Joseph, 
nor  yet  of  his  being  trained  with  especial  refer- 
ence to  service  at  the  court  of  Pharaoh,  or  of  a 
careful  instruction  in  foreign  wisdom  and  learn- 
ing. With  respect  to  the  latter  point,  indeed, 
Moses,  rather  than  Joseph,  would  serve  as  an 
example  (see  Acts  vii.  22).  Compare  also  Jerome 
(on  verse  8) :  "  Qiii  de  mensa  regis  et  de  vino 
potus  ejvs  non  tiilt  cmiiedere,  ne  poUuatui\ 
vtirjne  sisciret  ipsam  sajyicntidm  ntque  dvctrinam 
Bdhyloniorvm  esse  peccatmn.  nunrjunm  acqid- 
esceret  discere,  quod  non  licebnt.  Discvnt  au- 
tem  non  ut  segvantw;  sed  vt  jtidicent  atqne 
convincant.  Qumnodo  si  giiisjmtm  ndversiia 
mathemdticos  relit  seribere  imperitus  uai)nfin-or, 
risui  patent,  et  adrersum  pMlosophos  disjnitniis, 
si  ignoret  dogmata  pldhtsophorum.  Discvnt 
ergo  ea  mente  doetrinam  Clialdreanim,  qua  et 
Moyses  o^nnem  supientiam  ^Sgyptionim  didi- 
cerat." 

4  The  nomiletical  treatment  will,  of  course, 
seize  on  the  chief  and  fimdamental  ethical  prin- 
ciple of  the  section,  as  indicated  above,  under 
1,  without  regard  to  subordinate  details.  Thus, 
perhaps  :  "  Not  dainty  food,  but  the  blessing  of 
God  develops  beauty  and  strength.  All  wis- 
dom, even  in  worldly  concerns,  is  a  gift  of  God, 
and  the  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning  of  thi.i 
wisdom  also"  (Starke,  after  the  BiU.  Tiibing.). 
— Or  :  "  Man  shall  not  live  by  bread  alone,  but 
by  every  word  that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth 
of  God"  (Deut.  viii,  3  ;  Matt.  iv.  4).— Or  :  "  It  is 
a  good  thing  that  the  heart  be  established  with 
grace;  not  with  meats"  (Heb.  xiii.  9),  etc. 
Compare  Melancthon :  "  Uanid  in  aula  neo 
mixix  nee  contemptu,  nee  illecebris  roliiptatem  ant 
poteiiti(f  victus  est,  vt  deficeret  a  rero  cvUn. 
Hanc  conntantiam  paud  imitnntur,  sed  qui 
itnitantur  /labebunt  ingentin  preemin  corporalia 
(t  spiritualia.  sieiit  inqiiit  teiias :  GU/i-iJicante* 
me  glorificabo,  etc.     (3  Sam.  ii.  20)." 


The  vision  of  the  monareMes,  or  Nebuehadnezzar^s  dream  concerning  the  four  irorld-kingdoms, 
and  its  i)iterjirttation  by  Daniel. 

U.   1-49. 

And   in   the  second   year  of  the  reign  of  Xebucliadnezzai-.  Nebuchadnezzar 

dreamed  dreams,  wherewith  [and]  his  spirit  was  troubled,'  and  his  sleep  brake 
:  from  liim.'      Then  [And]  the  king  commanded  '  to  call  the  magicians,  and   tlie 

astrologers,  and  the  sorcerers,  and  the  Chaldneans,  for  to  shew  [tell]  the  king 
I  liis  dreams.     So  [And]  they  came  and  stood   l)etbre   the  king.     And  the   king 

said  unto  them,  Ihave  dreamed  a  dream,  and  my  spirit  was  troubled  '  to  know 

the  dream. 


CHAP.  n.  1-49.  <55 


4  Then  spake  the  Chaldeans  to  the  king  in  Syriac  [Aramaic],  O  king,  live 
forever!  tell  thy   servants  the  dream,   and  we  will  shew  the  interpretation. 

5  The  king  answered  and  said  to  the  Chaldseans,  The  thing  [word]  is  gone 
from  me  :  if  ye  will  not  make  known  unto  me  the  dream,  with  [and]  the  inter- 
pretation thereof,  ye  shall  be  cut  in  pieces,'  and   your  houses  shall  be  made  a 

fi  dunghill  [sink].  But  [And]  if  ye  shew  the  dream,  and  the  interpretation 
thereof,  ye  shall  receive  of  [from  before]  me  gifts  and  rewards  [largess],  and 
great  honour  :  therefore  shew  me  the  dream  and  <Ae  interpretation  thereof. 

7  They  answered   again,  and   said.  Let  the  king  tell  his  servants  the  dream, 

8  and  we  will  shew  the  interpretation  of  it.  The  king  answered  and  said,  I  know 
of  certainty   that  ye  icoxdd  gain  the  time,  because  ye  see  the   thing  [word]  is 

9  ofone  from  me.  But  [,  that]  if  ye  will  not  make  known  unto  me  the  dream, 
"there  is  but  one  decree  for  you ;  for  [and]  ye  have  prepared  lying  and  corrupt 
words  [a  lie  and  a  corrupt  word]  to  speak  before  me  till  the  time  be  changed  ;' 
therefore  tell  me  the  dream,  and  I  shall  know  that  ye  can  shew  me  the  inter 
pretation  thereof. 

10  The  Chaldeans  answered  before  the  king,  and  said.  There  is  not  a  man  upon 
the  earth''  that  can  shew  the  king's  matter :  therefore  there  is  no  king,  lord,  nor 
ruler,  that  asked  such  things  [a  matter]  at  any  magician,  or  astrologer,   or  Chal- 

1 1  dajan.  And  it  is  a  rare  thing  [And  the  matter]  that  the  king  requireth  [asketh 
is  weighty]  ;  and  there  is  none  other  that  can  shew  it  before  the  king  except 
the  gods,  whose  dwelling  is  not  with  flesh. 

12  For  this  cause  the  king  was  angry  and  very  furious,  and   commanded 'to 

13  destroy  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon.  And  the  decree  went  forth  that  [,  and] 
the  wise  men  should  be  slain  [were  about  to  be  killed]  ;  and  they  sought  Daniel 
and  his  fellows  to  be  slain. 

14  Then  Daniel  answered  with'  counsel  and  wisdom  to  Arioch  the  captain  of  the 

15  king's  guard,"  which  was  [who  had]  gone  forth  to  slay  the  wise  men  of  Babylon  : 
he  answered  and  said  to  Arioch  the  king's  captain.  Why  is  the  decree  so  hasty 

16  from  the  king  ?  Then  Arioch  made  the  thing  known  to  Daniel.  Then  [And] 
Daniel  went  in,  and  desired  of  the  king  that  he  would  give  him  time,  and 
that  he  would  shew  [even  to  show]  the  king  the  interpretation. 

IT       Then   Daniel  went  to  his  house,  and  made  the  thing  known  to  Hananiah, 

18  Mishael,  and  Azariah,  his  com)ianions  ;  that  they  would  desire  [even  to  request] 
mercies  of  the  God  of  lieaven  [the  heavens]  concerning  this   secret,  that  Daniel 

19  and  his  fellows  should  not  perish  with  the  rest  of  the  wise  men  of  Babylon.  Then 
was  the  secret  revealed  unto  Daniel  in  a  night-vision.      Then  Daniel  blessed  the 

20  God  of  heaven  [the  heavens].  Daniel  answered  and  said,  Blessed  be  (/(e  name 
of  God 'for  ever  and  ever  [from  everlasting  and  to  everlasting]  ;  for  wisdom 

21  and  might  are  his.'"  And  he  "  changeth  the  times  and  the  seasons  :  he  removeth 
kin£;s,  and  setteth  up  kings  ;  he  giveth  wisdom  unto  the  wise,  and  knowledge  to 

22  thein  that  know  understanding.     lie  "  re vealeth  the  deep  and  secret  ?/n»^s.-    he 

23  knoweth  what  is  in  the  darkness,  and  the  light  dwelleth  with  him.  I  thank 
thee,  and  praise  thee,  0  thou  God  of  my  fathers,  who  hast  given  me  wisdom  and 
might,  and  made  known  unto  me  now  "  what  we  desired  of  thee  :  for  thou 
hast  )ioiv  made  known  unto  us  the  king's  matter. 

24  Therefore  Daniel  went  in  unto "  Arioch,  whom  the  king  liad  ordained 
[apj)ointed]  to  destroy  the  wise  men  of  Babylon :  he  went  and  said  thus  unto 
him,  Destroy  not  "  the   wise  men  of  Babylon  :    bring  me  in  before  the  king, 

25  and  I  will  shew  unto  the  king  the  interpretation.  Then  Arioch  brought  in 
Daniel  before  the  king  in  haste,  and  said  thus  unto  him,"  I  have  found  a  man  of 
the  captives  [children  of  the  captivity]  of  Judah  that  [who]  will  make  known 

2G  unto  the  king  the  interpretation.  The  king  answered  and  said  to  Daniel, 
whose  name  vxis  Belteshazzar,  Art  thou  able  to  make  known  unto  me  the 
dream  which  I  have  seen,  and  the  interpretation  thereof? 

27  Daniel  answered  in  the  presence  of  [before]  the  king,  and  said,  The  secret 
which  the  king  hath  demanded  [asked],  cannot  the  wise  men,  the  astrologers,  the 
magicians,  the  soothsayers,  shew  [the  wise  7tien. . .  .cannot  show]  unto  the  king ; 

28  Init  [yet]  there  is  a  God  in   heaven  [the  heavens]  that  revealeth  secrets,  and 

5 


06  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


maketh  known  to  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar  what  shall  be  in  the  latter  days 
[what  is  it  that  shall   be  in  the  end  of  the  days].     Thy  dream,  and  the  virions 

29  of'tliy  head  upon  thy  bed,  are  these  [is  this];  {an  for  thee,  O  king,  thy  thoughts 
caine  into  thy  mind  upon  thy  bed  what  should  come  to  pass  [what  it  is  that 
shall  be]  hereafter;  and  he  that  revealeth  secrets  niaketh  known  to  thee  what 

30  shall  come  to  pass  [what  it  is  that  shall  be]  :  but  [and]  as  for  me,  this  secret 
is  not  revealed  to  me  for  anij  wisdom  that  I  have  [is  in  me]  more  than  any 
living,  but  for  their  sakes  that  shall  make  known  the  interpretation  [but  in 
order  that  the  interpretation  may  be  made  known]  to  the  king,  and  that  thou 
mightest  kuow  the  thoughts  of  thy  heart:) 

31  Tliou,  O  king,  sawest,  and,  behold,  a  "  great  "  image.  This  great  image, 
whose  brightness  was  excellent,  stood  [a  great  image — this  image  was  large,  and 
its  brightness  excessive — rising]  before  thee,"  and  the  form  thereof  was  terrible. 

32  This  image's  head  [This  was  the  image  :  Its  head]  was  of  fine  "  gold,   his  breast 

its  breasts]   and   his  [its]  arms  of  silver,   his  belly  [its  bowels]  and  his  thighs 

33  [its  thighs]  of  brass  [copper],  his  [its]  legs  of  iron,  his  [its]  feet  part  [of  them] 

34  of  iron  and  part  [of  them]  of  clay.  Thou  sawest  till  that  a  stone  was  cut  out 
without  hands,  which    [and  it]  smote  the  image  upon  his  [its]   feet,  that  were 

Uo  of  iron  and  clay,^°  and  brake  them  to  pieces  [crushed  them].  Then  was  [were] 
the  iron,  the  clay,  the  brass,  the  silver,  and  the  gold,  broken  to  pieces  together," 
and  became  like  </;e  chatf  of  [from]  the  summer  threshing-floors  ;  and  the  wind 
carried  them  away,  that  [and]  no  place  was  found  for  them  :  and  the  stone 
that  smote  the  image  became  [was  for]  a  great  mountain,  and  filled  the  whole 
[all  the]  earth. 

36  This  is  the  dream ;  and  we  will  tell  the  interpretation  thereof  [its  inter- 
pretation we  will  tell]  before  the  king. 

37  Thou,  O  king,  art  a  king  of  kings  [the  kings]  :  for  the  God  of  heaven  [the  heav- 
ens] hath  given  thee  a  [the]  kingdom,  [the]  power,  and  [the]  strength,  and  [the] 

38  glor}'."^  And  wheresoever  the  children  of  men  dwell  [in  every /)foce  thaX  the 
sons  of  man  are  dwelling],  the  beasts  [living  thing]  of  the  field,  and  the  fowls 
[bird]   of  the  heaven   [heavens],   hath   he  given  into  [in]  thy   hand,  and  hath 

39  made  thee  ruler  [rule]  over  them  all.  Thou  art  this  [the]  head  of  gold.  And 
after  thee  shall  arise  another  kingdom  inferior  to  [earthward  from]  thee,  and 


of  brass,^'  M'hich  shall 
a  kingdom  the  fourth] 


another   third   kingdom   [a  kingdom   the  thii-d  another 

40  hear  rule  over  all  the  earth.      And  the  fourth  kingdom 
shall  be  strong  as  iron  :  forasmuch  as  iron  breaketh  in  pieces  and  subdueth  all 
things  [the  whole]  ;    and  as  iron  that   breaketh  all  these,  shall  it  break  in  jneces 

41  and  l)ruise.  And  whereas  thou  sawest  the  feet  and  [the]  toes  part  [of  them] 
of  ])0tter's  clay  and  part  [of  them]  of  iron,  the  kingdom  shall  be  divided  [a 
divided  kingdom  it  shall  be]  ;  but  [and]  there  shall  be  in  it  of  the  strength  of  the 

42  iron,  forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  the  iron  "  mixed  with  mii-y  clay.  And  as  the 
toes  of  the  feet  tvere  part  [of  them]  of  iron   and  part  [of  them]  of  clay  ;  so  the 

43  kingdom  shall  be  partly  ^'  strong,  and  partly  [part  of  it  shall  be]  broken.  And" 
whereas  tliou  sawest  iron  mixed  with  miry  clay,  they  shall  mingle  themselves 
with  tiie  seed   of  men    [man];  but  [and]  they  shall  not  cleave  one  to  anothei 

Ai  [this  with  this],  even  as  iron  is  not  mixed  with  clay.  And  in  the  [their]  days 
of  these  kings  shall  the  God  of  heaven  [the  lieavens]  set  up  a  kingdom,  which 
shall  never  be  destroyed  ;  and  the  kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to  other  [another] 
jieople,  hnt  it  shall  break  in  pieces  and  consume  all  these  kingdoms,  and  it  "  shall 

45  stand  for  ever.  Forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  that  the  [a]  stone  was  cut  out  of 
the  mountain  without  [upon  not  with]  iiands,  and  that  it  brake  in  pieces  the 
iron,"  the  brass,"  the  clay,"  the  silver,"  and  the  gold ;"  the  great  God 
hath  made  known  to  the  king  what  shall  come  to  pass  hereafter  [what  it  is  that 
shall  be  after  this]  :  and  the  dream  is  certain,  and  the  interpretation  thereof 
sure. 

46  Then  the  king  Xebuchadnezzar  fell  upon  his  face,  and  worshipped  Daniel,  and 
commanded  that  they  should  offer  [to   ofler]  an  oblation  and  sweet  odours  unto 

47  him.  The  king  answered  unto  Daniel,  and  said.  Of  a  truth  it  is  that  your  God 
is  ''"  a  God  of  gods,  and  a  Lord  of  kings,  and   a  revealer  of  secrets,  seeing  [that1 


CHAP.  11.  1-49. 


67 


48  tliou  couldest  reveal  this  secret.  Then  the  king  made  Daniel  a  great  man  "  and 
gave  him  many  great  gifts,  and  made  him  ruler  over  the  whole  [all  the] 
province  of  Babylon,  and   chief  of  the  governors  over  all  the  wise  mere  of  Bah- 

49  ylon.  Then  [And  |  Daniel  requested  of  the  king,  and  he  set  Shadrach,  Meshach, 
and  Abednego,  over  the  aflairs  of  the  province  of  Babylon  ;  but  [andj  Danio' 
iat  in  the  gate  of  the  king. 

GKAMMATICAL    AND    LEXICAL    NOTES. 

I*  DSSfl"!!  beat  itself  to  and  fro^  was  agitated  with  conflicting  thonghts  and  feelings. — '  "^^^5  nr^nl,  wox 
become  upon  him^  a  Chaldaizing  sense  of  the  verb,  like  our  colloquial  "was  all  over  with  him". — '  1?3H"T»  said^  in 
the  Chaldee  sense.  — *  "l^lS^rit^  ^"^JS^r?,  bits  ye  shall  be  made,  i.e.,  "chopped  into  mince  meat; "  probably  a  Bnbj- 
lonian  form  of  punishment  li^e  "killing  by  inches." — *  K_3ri*I37'  ^^  turned,  i.e.,  pass  by. — '  fi<riwS'^j  the  dry  ground^ 
an  emphatic  term  for  the  world. — '  S'^rrii  returned  in  answer. — ®  K'nSO»  the  executionerti,  such  being  in  Oriental 
courts  an  important  part  of  the  royal  body-guard. — '  Nribfi^,  the  God,  like  C^Hifcin*  i.e.,  the  true  God. — i*  rlj'^'l 
H"^n,  for  (I  Bay)  his  it  is,  i.e.,  each  of  the  preceding  qualities. — **  H^H^)  is  emphatic,  and  He,  The  pronoun  is  under- 
stood with  the  following  clauses. — *'  ^5^1  and  now  ;  the  position  makes  these  terms  emphatic ;  g.  d.,  at  once,  promptly 
in  this  emergency. — '  ^  ^j7,  upon,  seems  here  to  denote  the  abruptness  of  the  interview,  q.  d.,  came  upon. — ^*  ^2*inP"iN» 
the  deprecatory  form,  mayest  thou  not  destroy: — '*  The  1^  following  is  expletive,  like  on  before  direct  quotations. — 
"  in,  one,  i.e.,  a  single  one,  standing  alone  and  conspicuous. — *^  H^5®i  huge  or  colos&al  ;  a  different  and  stronger 
term  than  the  "^  immediately  following. — '^  "nb-pbi  in  front  of  thee  :  a  stronger  term,  like  the  Heb.  na^thanQ^p, 
so  frequently  used  in  the  conte.xt, — '"  2t3)  good,  i.e.,  pure. — ''^  KDDm  KbT^B,  the  iron  and  the  clay,  i.e.,  th» 
materials  just  described.  The  art.  is  emphatic,  as  in  the  following  verse. — '*  mnS,  like  one  thing,  all  at  once;  denot* 
ing  suddenness  as  well  as  simultaneonsnoss. — ^^  With  these  epithets  compare  the  similar  terms  in  the  (spurious  or  late) 
doxology  at  the  close  of  the  Lord's  Prayer. — ^^  itwH^  is  rather  copper,  the  simple  metal ;  for  zinc,  which  is  a  component 

of  brass,  was  anciently  unknown.— '*  Jtbl^B*    The  article  here,  though  present,  as  in  all  the  preceding  verses,  should 

not  be  expressed  in  English,  as  it  merely  indicates  the  material.— ^^  fSl?  "  T^J  tnpart  (lit.  from  the  end);   a  different 

expression  from   the  partitives  elsewhere  used    in    this   connection.—"  The  1  connective  is  wanting  in  the  text,  but 
U  supplied  in  the  Masoretic  margin.—"  The  H"irT,  It,  is  emphatic=««ej^.— '"  The  S'lh  is  an  emphatic  copula=fte  i«. 

_a»  -I3T    bs'^:nbi  Ht.  magnified  Daniel,  i.e.,  promoted  him.] 


EXEGETICAL   REMARKS. 

Verses  1-3.  Nebuchadnezzar  demands  ten  in- 
terpretation of  7m  dream  by  the  Magi.  And 
in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, i.e.,  in  the  second  year  of  his  sole 
reign,  which,  as  remarked  in  g  8,  note  2,  of  the 
Introduction,  must  have  commenced  some  time 
after  the  fourth — perhaps  in  the  sixth — year  of 
the  reign  of  Jehoiakim.  The  time,  therefore, 
is  about  four  years  Later  th.an  that  mentioned  in 
chap.  i.  1,  and  soon  after  that  designat<3d  in 
chap.  i.  IS.  The  three  ye.ara  of  the  training  of 
Daniel  and  his  companions  had  expired,  perhaps 
by  only  a  few  weeks  or  months,  and  their  recep- 
tion into  the  number  of  the  royal  officials,  as 
well  as  among  the  magicians,  in  the  broader 
sense  of  the  term,  was"  of  recent  occurrence, 
when  the  remarkable  event  transpired  which  is 
here  recoi-ded,  and  which  raised  the  four  Jews 
to  a  far  more  exalted  position  in  the  royal  favor. 
There  is,  therefore,  no  conflict,  either  with 
those  passages  of  chap,  i  nor  with  Jer.  xxv.  1, 
where  "  the  first  ye.ar  of  Nebuchadnezzar,"  does 
not  designate  the  first  year  of  his  sole  reign,  but 
of  his  joint  rule.  Compare  Hengstenljerg,  p.  60 
et  seq. ,  who  is  correct,  in  opposition  to  those 
who  find  here  essentially  a  chronological  error 
I  Berth.,   Bleek,    H:tz.,eto.);  and  also,  as  com- 


pared with  the  less  suitable  modes  of  reconcil- 
iations attempted  by  several,  e.  g..  Wieseler  (i)i« 
70  WoeJicn,  etc. ,  p.  8  et  seq. ),  who  places  the 
event  narrated  in  this  chapter  before  the  expir- 
ation of  the  three  years  of  Daniel's  training,  and 
therefore  >c/w?'e  chap.  i.  18-20,  thus  regarding 
it  as  a  supplementary  attestation  and  illustration 
of  the  statement  in  chap.  i.  20  (also  Fuller,  p. 
33etseq. );  Havemick  'Neiie  krit.  Unters.,  p. 
04),  who  places  the  facts  stated  in  chap,  i;  1  et 
seq.  altogether  at  the  beginning  of  the  third 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  and  assumes  in  addition, 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  became  king  a  whole  year 
later;  from  which  it  follows  that  .38-r!l)  months 
may  have  elapsed  between  the  taking  of  Je- 
rusalem and  the  transportation  of  Daniel  (chap, 
i.  1  et  seq.),  and  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
dream.  Ewald's  opinion  that  '^~^'.}  has  been 
lost  from  after  3"'.Pi"",  which  would  give  the 
ticelfth  instead  of  the  second  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, is  likewise  superfluous.  * — The  copula  in 

*  [It  would  be  very  natural  for  a  Jewish  writer.  look 
ing  at  events  from  the  Palestinian  point  of  view,  as 
Jeremiah,  to  date  occurrences  at'corlini?  to  the  actual 
arrival  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  apparent  sovereign  in 
SjTia.  although  in  reality  only  a  viceioy  in  place  of 
his  father.  A  precisely  parallel  reckoning  occurs  in 
Luke  ill.  1.  with  reference  to  the  associate  instead  ol 
the    sole    reign    of    Tiberius,    as    chronologcra  are    now 


68 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


■r    r:™r-    probably  indicates  that  verses  1-ia 
were    written    immediately  after  chap.   i.     and 
doubtless  for  the  purpose  of  connecting  this  in- 
troductory section  more  closely   with  the  Chal- 
daic  fragment,  chap.  ii.   4A-49.   which,    together 
with  the  narratives  in  Chaldee  that  follow,  may 
have  already  existed  in  manuscript  form.     Com- 
pare the  Intr.  §  4 — Nebuchadnezzar  dreamed 
dreams.    ["It  has  justly  been  regarded  as  a  sig- 
nificant thing,  that  it  was   Nebuchadnezzar,  the 
founder  of  the  world-power,  who  first  saw  in  a 
dream    the   whole   future  development  of   the 
world-power  (and  even  its  final  overthrow)  .... 
This  circumstance   also   is     worthy   of   notice, 
that   Nebuchadnezzar   did   not   himself  under- 
stand the  revelation  which  he  received,  but  the 
prophet  Daniel,   enlightened  by  God,  must  in- 
terpret it  to  him." — Keil.]     The  plural  ri?;":n 
is   used   in   this   place    with  reference   to  the 
several  contents  of  the  dream,  which,  according 
to  ver.se  31,  comprises  a  number  of  scenes  :    (1) 
The  sight  of  the  great  image  ;  (2)  its  destruction ; 
and  iM)  the  growth  of  the  stone  which  caused 
its  ruin,  until  it  became  a  gigantic  mountain. 
The  dream  thus  manifested  its  confused,  my.ste- 
rious  character,   that  dissolved  into  indefinite- 
ness.    The  plural  may,  therefore,  with  a  certain 
propriety  be  taken  as  a  plural  of  unlimited  uni- 
versality, which  serves  to  prepare  the  way  for 
'he  singular  that  follows  in  verse  3,  in  so  far  as 
rt  designates  the  whole  of  the  confused  and  com- 
plex nature  of  the  dream,  among  whose  visions 
the   image    of  the    monarchies    and     its    fate, 
were  prominent  in   importance  and  in  the  im- 
pression they  produced  (cf.  Hiivem,  and  Maur. 
on  the  passage).     The  rabbinical  interpretation, 
which  refers  the  plural  to  the   dream   and  its 
explanation,  is  certainly    to  be  rejected    {e.  //., 
Jos  Jacchiad.) ;  and  also  the  unauthorized  iden- 
tification of   r-.'ibn    with  =i:n  (Sept.,   Vulg., 
Luther,  etc.  ;  and  also  Hiivernick,  who  endeavors 
to  define  this   as  & pl:',rul  of   iiifcusity.  support- 
ing his  view  by  a  comparison  with  rii?:~n,  Prov. 
i.   21);   ix.   I.   which  is   certainly   not    plural). — 
Wherewith    his    spirit   was    troubled.     Verse 
3,    and  also  Gen.  xli.  8    (where  the  awaking  of 
Pharaoh  from  his  dream  is   described)    employ 
the  Niphal  "'ET!!  in  the    same  sense   that  the 
Hithpael  in  this  place  bears,  viz. :  as  indicating 
the  alarm  of  one  who  has  been  frightened  by  a 
dream;  compare  Psa.  Ixxvii.   5,  ■'F'3"p;  "J  am 
BO  troubled  "  (properly,  "  I  am  bruised,  beaten," 
cuiitiindor).    and    also   the    Greek    miinT-tviini. 
"  The  Hithpael  intensifies  the  conception  of  inter- 
nal disturbance   contained  in  the  Niphal,  so  that 
it  implies  that  its  outwjird  expression  could   not 
be    mist.iken  "    iKraniohf.). —  And     his     sleep 
brake  from  him."  or  "and  his  sleep  was   over 
for  him."     So,  properly,  the   Sept.,  Vulg.,   Lu- 
ther, Berth.,  etc.,  and,  in  general  a  majority  of 
e.xpositors,     On  the  Niphal  iTn\  in  the  sense  of 
being;w.'<!:  or  completed,  compare  chap.  viii.   27, 
and   especially   Jlic.  ii.   4.      The    phrase    "  His 
Bleep    went    from  him"    (chap,  vi    Ii);    Est.  vi. 

pretry  well  iiL'i\'e'-U  Daninl  on  tile  other  baud,  writing 
a*  r.nbyluii.  altlio  it^h  by  cnnrtfsy  he  applies  the  generiil 
title  "kii'.K"  to  Xebuchailnczzar.  while  yet  but  niluputy. 
l^  exact  iu  his  stuteiiient  of  the  reara  of  the  reicn 
Uwlt.l  *" 


1)  conveys  a  somewhat  different  idea.  T'byi 
"over  him,"  or  "for  him,"  expresses,  as  fre- 
quently with  conceptions  of  emotional  activity, 
the  .sense  of  the  dative  in  a  more  circumstantial 
and  emphatic  manner;  cf.  chap.  iv.  24;  vi.  19; 
X.  8,  and  see  Geseniu.s'  T/ie-wurvs,  p.  1027,  3,  e. 
Hiivernick  renders  it  incorrectly  :  "  His  sleep 
came  on  him  heavily  ;"  for  the  statement  that 
the  king  was  greatly  troubled  does  not  admit  of 
the  other,  that  a  heavy  plumber  had  seized  on 
him.  Rather  verse  3  shows  clearly  that  the 
desire  to  recall  his  dream,  hence  such  an  effort 
to  recollect  as  would  necessarily  banish  sleep, 
formed  the  real  cause  of  his  disturbance. — On 
the  phenomenon  that  Nebuchadnezzar  should 
have  a  dream  of  prophetic  significance,  and  then 
forget  it  (with  reference  to  many  of  its  details, 
if  not  entirely)  consult  the  dogmatico-ethical 
considerations.  No.  1. — Verse  2.  And  the  king 
commanded  to  cetll  the  magicians,  etc.  This 
is  exactly  similar  to  Gen.  xli.  8,  to  which  record 
the  writer  seems  designedly  to  have  conformed 
in  expression.  Of  the  four  classes  of  wise  men 
here  remarked  (■^"p"'2n>  verse  27),  the  Chartum- 
mim  and  Ashaphim  have  already  been  mentioned, 
chap.  i.  20  (see  on  that  place).     The    BICE:?:, 

mentioned  as  a  third  class,  are  clearly  "  enchan- 
ters;" cf.  q',23  (properly  "to  mutter  words  of 

incantation ;"  Sept. ,  ifiapimKeicn-l^ai)  2  Chron. 
xxxiii.  6,  and  CiO^C  (dapuakdr)  Ex.vii.  11  ;  Deut. 

xlviii.  10.  The  term  designates,  in  correspond- 
ence with  its  harsher  formation,  a  stronger  and 
more  passionate  mode  of  incantation  than  ci',:;k 
— an  app.trent  and  observable  enchantment,  aa 
distinguished  from  the  mere  breathing  of  magi- 
cal formulas.  The  further  mention  of  the  D''Ti;2i 

Chaldasans,  in  connection  with  the  Chartum- 
mim,  etc.,  and  therefore,  as  a  special  class  of 
wise  men  coordinate  with  the  others,  involvea 
no  abuse  or  carelessness  of  expression .  but  rather 
corresponds  fully  with  the  statement  of  Hero- 
dotus (I.  181),  that  the  Chaldieans  were  the 
priests.of  Bel,  and  with  that  of  Diodorus  (11.24), 
that  the  Babylonians  termed  their  priests  Xn/- 
(!aZo(.  Those  designated  in  this  place  as  f'lwS 
are  therefore  the  sacerdotal  wise  men  (ct.Hesy- 
chius,  s.  V.  Xa/i\aioi,  where  the  Chaldaeans  are 
distinguished  as  a  yivoQ  Mn-.i,iv),  who,  it  is  pro- 
bable, were  specially  occupied  with  astronomy, 
the  aboriginal  science  of  the  nations  about  the 
Euphrates  and  the  Tigris,  whose  founder  was 
supposed  to  be  Belus,  the  chief  divinity  of  the 
Chaldieans  (Pliny,  //.  N.,  vi.  30:  ^' Bdim — inven- 
tor siderrdis  scientiiv").  As  astronomers,  they 
were  probably  classed  with  the  nsstrthr/crs,  the 
"C'^^i  who  are  mentioned  in  connection  with 
them  in  chap.  iv.  4;  v.  7,  11,  and  instead  of 
them  in  verse  27  of  this  chapter  (see  on  that 
passage).  The  nationality  of  these  Chaldieans 
was  clearly  different  from  that  of  the  great 
mass  of  the  Babylonian  populace  ;  for  while 
these,  the  original  inhabitants  of  Shinar,  were 
pure  Shemites,  the  former  had  adopted  ra.any 
Aryan  elements  into  their  language  and  customs. 
The  Chaldaians.  after  inhabiting  Babylonia  for 
centuries,  as  a  kind  of  priestly  ca.ste,  attained  to 
political  supremacy  through  Belesys  or  Nabopo- 
lassar,  whom   Diodorus,  II.  36,   designates   aj 


CHAP.  II.  1-49. 


69 


e-rrc(7Ti^6raTov  rdv  hpeuv  oOf  "^aSv/uvmc  na/.ovct 
Xa/.rfaiOT'r,  hence  through  one  of  their  superior 
priests  (about  B.  C.  637).  They  retained  this 
pre-eminence  imtil  the  taking  of  Babylon  by 
Cyrus,  hence,  about  a  century  ;  but  this  prob- 
ably did  not  exclude  the  primitive  Babylonian 
priesthood  from  its  place  beside  the  sacerdotal 
class  of  the  dominant  nationality,  either  in  re- 
gard to  office,  or  to  consider.ation.  Thus  we  may 
explain  why  the  Chaldeans  are  only  co-ordinate 
with  the  other  classes  of  magicians  in  this  place 
and  in  the  passages  of  chap.  iv.  and  v.  which 
have  been  mentioned,  and  also  understand  the 
fact  that  the  official  language  (according  to 
verse  i)  was  not  the  Chaldee,  but  continued  to 
be  the  Aramtean  (primitive  Babylonian).  The 
Chaldteans,  Nabopolass.ar  and  Nebuchadnezzar 
did  not,  therefore,  found  a  one-sided,  intolerant, 
sacerdotal  dynasty  ;  they  had  rather,  so  far  as  this 
was  possible, become  thorough  Babylonians,or,  in 
other  words,  Aramaeans.  The  Chaldaeans,  howev- 
er, must  have  formed  the  jwt.iur  pars  of  the  whole 
body  of  the  wise  men  ao  the  court,  for  no  other 
supposition  will  explain  why  the  entire  corps  are 
designated  sometimes  as  3"'l'i'2~,  and  at  others 
as  I?5  ''?;''3~,  in  the  following  account  (verses 
4,  a,  10,  cf.  verses  11,  12.  etc.).  Compare  Hitz. 
and  Kranichf.  on  this  passage,  and  see  infra,  on 
verse  4.  — For  to  show  the  king  his  dreams. 
All  of  the  four  classes  of  wise  men  just  men- 
tioned were  therefore  to  co-operate  in  interpret- 
ing the  dream,  "  because  in  this  important  mat- 
ter the  facts  and  opinions  were  to  be  settled 
by  various  methods,  and  possibly,  to  be  placed 
on  record.  The  several  classes  of  wise  men 
supplemented  each  other  on  such  occasions,  and 
assisted  each  other  mutually  by  their  peculiar 
methods.  Thus,  the  priests  might  propitiate 
the  gods  and  invoke  tlieir  aid,  by  sacrifices  ;  the 
conjurers  might  contribute  to  the  increase  of 
prophetic  ability,  as  might  also  the  enchanters, 
e.g.,  by  the  use  of  narcotics,  etc.  In  this  way 
the  Egyptian  wise-men  were  constantly  em- 
ployed in  individual  cases  as  a  ci'aryjuc,  accord- 
ing to  Diodoriis,  II.  30."  (Kranichf. ) — Verse  3. 
My  spirit  was  troubled  to  know  the  dream. 
A  constr.  pragmin.s.  which  signifies,  "  My  spirit 
bas  become  troubled  (cf.  on  verse  1),  and  desir- 
ous to  know  the  dream  "  The  king  clearly 
desires  to  have  his  dream  rehearsed,  and  not 
merely  to  learn  its  meaning.  The  words 
ftiinT.S  Tf  "li  may  certainly  imply  the  latter, 
but  it  appears  definitely  from  verses  o  et  seq. ,  9 
et  seq.  26,  .and  3(5,  that  he  is  more  immediately 
concerned  to  recover  the  dream  itself.  The 
reason  was,  without  doubt,  that  he  had  really 
forgotten  it,  or,  as  is  frequently  the  case  with  in- 
tricate dreams,  many  of  its  particulars  had 
escaped  his  memory,  and  he  retained  only  a 
general  untlefined  impression  of  having  seen 
something  fearful,  monstrous,  and  alarming,  in 
his  dream.  A  total  forgetting  of  the  dream 
cannot  be  supposed  in  this  case,  since  it  was  not 
possible  for  the  king  to  be  so  greatly  troubled 
as  to  lose  his  sleep  about  a  dream  which  he  had 
forgotten  entirely  (verse  1).  Nor  can  it  be  as- 
sumed that  he  really  recollected  the  dream,  and 
had  merely  pretended  that  he  no  longer  remem- 
bered it  (R.  Gaon  in  Ibn-Ezra,  Hengstenberg, 
Hiivemick) ;  for  the  writer  would  hardly  have 


left  unnoticed  a  representation  of  this  nature, 
which  aimed  to  test  the  magicians  ;  and,  in  ad- 
dition, the  rage  of  the  king,  as  described  in 
verse  12  et  seq,,  is  too  furious  to  be  pretended. 
[On  the  other  hand,  Keil  justly  contends  (with 
the  majority  of  interpreters)  that  he  had  not 
essentially  forgotten  his  dream.  "It  is  psy- 
chologically improbable  that  so  impressive  a 
dream,  which,  on  awaking,  he  had  forgotten, 
should  have  yet  sorely  disquieted  his  spirit  dur 
ing  his  waking  hours.  '  The  disquiet  was 
created  in  him,  as  in  Pharaoh  (Gen.  xli, ),  by  the 
specially  strikhig  incidents  of  the  dream,  and 
the  fearful,  alarming  apprehensions  with  refer- 
ence to  his  future  fate  connected  therewith ' 
(Kran. ).  According  to  verse  9,  Nebuchadnezzar 
wished  to  hear  the  dream  from  the  wise  men 
that  he  might  thus  have  a  guarantee  for  the 
correctness  of  the  inter^jretations  which  they 
might  give.  He  could  not  thus  have  spoken  to 
them  if  he  had  wholly  forgotten  the  dream,  and 
had  only  a  dark  apprehension  remaining  in  his 
mind  that  he  had  dreamed.  In  that  case  he 
would  neither  have  offered  a  great  reward  for 
the  announcement  of  the  dream,  nor  have 
threatened  severe  punishment,  even  death,  for 
failure  in  announcing  it.  For  then  he  would 
only  have  given  the  Chaldaeans  the  opjjortunity, 
at  the  cost  of  truth,  of  declaiing  any  dream 
with  an  interpretation.  '  The  Magi  boasted 
that  by  the  help  of  the  gods  they  could  reveal 
deep  and  hidden  things'  (Hengst. )."  It  is  very 
probable,  however,  that  while  the  king  retained 
a  lively  recollection  of  the  main  features  of  the 
dream,  he  might  have  forgotten  some  of  the 
particulars,  which,  if  rehearsed  again,  he  would 
be  able  to  recognize.  This  justifies  the  whole 
proceeding.] 

Verse  4.  The  rfply  of  t!ic  mirt/iriiin.^.  Then 
spake  the  Chaldaeans  to  the  king  in  Syriac, 
i.e.,  Aramaic.  'T'r';?^,  the  Aramaic  dialect  of 
the  Babylonians,  which  was  still  prevalent  at  the 
court  of  the  Chaldaean  rulers,  Nabopolassar,  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, etc.,  and  which  was  distinguished 
from  their  Chaldee  idiom,  including  numerous 
non-Shemitic  elements,  by  its  purelj-  Shemitic 
character,  and  especially  by  its  near  relationship 
to  the  Aramiean  of  the  Syrians.  Hence,  the  Sept. 
and  Theodotion  translate  Iv/nr^r',  the  Vulg. 
Hyrinee,  and  Xenophou  (Cymp.  VII.  o,  31) states 
directly  that  the  Babylonians  spoke  Syriac.  The 
reason  for  Daniel's  express  statement  that  the 
Chaldasans  addressed  the  king  in  .\ramaic  (note 
the  verb  "^31,  corresponding  to  the  adverb  ;  cf. 
Isa.  xxxvi.  11)  consists  simply  in  the  fact  that  he 
desired  to  call  the  attention  of  his  Hebrew 
readers  to  the  contrast  between  the  nationality 
of  the  3"''^23,  i.e.,  the  majority  of  the  wise 
men  who  were  summoned  before  the  king,  and 
the  purely  Shemitic  language,  which  they  were 
obliged  to  employ  (cf.  on  verse  3).  It  is  wrong 
to  look  for  tlie  reason  of  their  use  of  Aramaic, 
with  Palmblad,  Havernick,  and  others,  in  their 
desire  to  hide  the  confession  of  their  ignorance 
from  the  turbd  ad.itiintinin.  This  might  rather 
have  been  accomplished  by  the  use  of  Chaldee, 
while  the  Aramaean  was  familiar  to  all  present 
as  the  language  of  the  court  and  nation.  Cora- 
pare  supra  on  chap.  i.  4,  and  also  the  correct 
remark  of  Fuller  (p.  37) :   "  While  the  language 


70 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


of  the  ChaldiEans  was  the  langunge  of  science. 
this  (the  Aram.)  was  the  Inngxinge  of  popuhtr 
intere<iin-si." — O  king,  live  for  ever.  This  was 
an  introductonr  formula  of  the  address  to  the 
king  (cf,  chap.'iii.  9  ;  r.  10;  vi.  7,  22).  attested 
as  a  general  Oriental  formula  of  greeting  by  1 
Sam.  X.  24  (Saul) ;  1  Kings  i.  31  (David) ;  Neh. 
ii.  3  (Artaxerxes)  ;  ^lian,  V.  H.,  I,  31  (^nci'/tv 
'\pvn:tp^7i,  rli  a'lijvor  Baai'/.Fini^) ;  Curtius.  Ii.,  VI. 
6  (Alexander  the  Gr.);  Judith  xii.  14  (Holofer- 
nes.i. — On  the  Keri  ""IJ'T,  and  similar  omis- 
sions of  1  in  the  Keris.  verse  26;  iv.  16;  v. 
10,  etc.,  see  Hitzig  and  Kranichf.  on  this  place. 
Verses  5.  6.  Itenticed  demand  by  the  king, 
connected  with  a  utern  menace.  The  king  .  .  . 
said  to  the  Chaldaeans,  St^^liira'".  The  uncon- 
tracted  form  S<^S1U.'3,  a  stat.  emphat.  plwi:, 
from  "I'lH'iaJS,  lies  at  the  foundation  of  this 
Kethib,  as  well  as  of  the  Keri  "ST'.^'S; ;  compare 
Winer.  Grnmm.  de-s  bibl.  tiiid  targum.  Chal- 
daUvn..  S  32.  No.  3. — The  thing  is  gone  from 
me,  rather,  "  the  decree  is  made  known  by  me," 
i.e.,  it  is  my  settled  purpose,  I  say  it  with  all 
emphasis.  The  words  S*'^!?*  ''V?  T-r  should 
probably  be  rendered  in  this  way,  as  Hitz.  and 
Kranichf.  suggest;  for  (1)  this  view  only  is  con- 
sistent with  the  repetition  of  the  formula  in 
verse  8,  as  well  as  with  the  parallel  C^"J3  ''ItZ 
ore,  chap.  iii.  29 ;  iv.  3 ;  (2)  »~m,  which  is 
found  only  here  and  in  verse  S,  is  most  readily 
explained  by  comparison  with  the  Persian  mda 
or  (izttiida,  which  is  found  in  inscriptions,  and  is 
equivalent  to  pubUcalion,  science,  what  is 
known;  (3)  the  rendering  which  makes  ttux 
correspond  to  '*^"P,  "^k^'P',  "standing  fast" 
(PSsh. .  Ibn-Ezra,  the  rabbins  in  Saadia,  Winer, 
Hengstenb. ).  which  is  closely  related  to  the  one 
under  consideration,  is  untenal.ile  from  the  fact 
that  an  assurance  of  the  fixed  and  in-evocable 
character  of  the  royal  decree  would  here  be  out 
of  place,  and  that  an  identification  of  the  rootirs 
with  the  Araljic  ntzadu,  "to  be  firm,"  seems 
rather  precarious ;  (4)  the  identification  of  its 
with  ;ts».  ubiit  (verses  17,  24  ;  vi.  19,  20),  from 
which  arises  the  sense,  "the  word  has  gone  out 
from  me"  (Gesen. ,  Havem.,  Von  Lengerke, 
etc. )  is  opposed  by  the  extreme  improbability 
that  the  two  forms  are  identical  in  meai.ing, 
since  an  Interchange  of  ^  and  i  is  exceedingly 
rare,  and  especially  because  Daniel  always  em- 
ploys the  form  with  v  in  other  places  ;  (.5) 
finally,  the  view,  "the  word  has  escaped  my 
recollection,"  which  was  formerly  common,  and 
which  is  found  as  early  as  Theodotion  and  the 
Sept.  iCAjd.  C'hii.)  (li /ojo,-  a~'  i/mv  imtari),  the 
Vulgate  {sermo  recimt  a  me),  Luther,  Dereser, 
and  others,  but  «  hich  here,  and  much  more  in 
verge  8.  contradicts  the  whole  context,  and  does 
not  consist  with  the  only  admissible  sense  of 
nrbp  =  word,  command,  is  wholly  untenable  ; 
for  the  term  nowhere  in  this  chapter,  not  even 
in  verse  23.  signifies  the  dream  of  the  king,  but 
always  his  decree,  his  demand.  [Moreover, 
"  the  punctuation  of  the  word  S'llst  is  not  at 
all  that  of  a  verb,  for  it  can  neither  be  a  parti- 
ciple, nor  the  3dpers.  prajt.  fern."  (Keil),  but  it  is 


the  fem.  of  an  adj.  "l^N,  or  (as  Fiirst  thinks), 
an  adverbial  form  of  the  same.  The  mean- 
ing firm,  however,  which  the  author  rejects, 
seems  to  us  more  suitable  and  better  corn 
borated  than  any  other.]  —  Ye  shall  be  cu; 
in  pieces,  liain  "lUTS-  ^  be  made  pieces 
(Sept.  iha/ispii^cc-Hai  •  cf.  /^Oi  iro/fiv,  2  Maco.  i. 
16,  and  A,i;t;ro/;m',  Matt.  xxiv.  51) ;  a  cruel 
punishment  in  vogue  among  nil  the  nations  of 
antiquity,  and  especially  among  the  Chalda^ana 
(Eze.  xvi.  40 ;  xxiii.  47) ;  compare  chap.  iii.  29. 
— And  your  houses  shall  be  made  a  dunghill. 
Similarly  chap.  iii.  29,  and  also  Ezravii.  11,  where 
the  form  13^3  is  used  instead  of  Daniel's  "1]^" 
This  term,  derived  from  the  Pael  ;)13  =  IS?,  to 
soil,  defile,  indicates  the  extremely  disgraceful 
nature  of  the  threatened  penalty;  the  hciuses 
are  to  be  changed  into  dunghills,  by  being  lazed 
to  the  ground  and  covered  with  animal  and 
human  ordure — just  as  Jehu  turned  the  temple 
of  Baal  into  a  sink.  2  Kings  x.  27.  See  the 
proofs  of  the  frequent  use  of  this  method  of 
disgrace  and  punishment  in  the  East,  adduced 
by  Havemick. — Verse  6.  Te  shall  receive  of 
me  gifts  and  rewards,  and  great  honors; 
rather,  "great  treasures."  The  second  of  the 
terras  here  employed,  "?!?;,  "  reward  "  (compare 
the  plural  V2T::.  "gifts,"  chap.  v.  17,  and  the 
Tnrg.  Jonath.,  Jer.  xl.  5;  Deut.  xxxiii.  24)  is 
satisfactorily  explained  by  its  derivation  from 
TT;,  and  specially  from  a  Palpel  form  '?!?' 
fiiciiltates  suas  contemsit,  prodegit.  It  is  not 
necessary,  therefore,  to  refer  with  Berth., 
Eichhom.  etc. ,  to  the  Greek  loiiia/ja  in  its  eluci- 
dation, nor  with  Hang  (in  Ewald's  Jahrb.  d. 
bibl.  Wissenschaft,  1853,  p.  160).  Gesen. -Dietr., 
etc.,  to  institute  a  comparison  with  the  old 
Persian  ni-bag-td,  "  presentation,"  nor,  above 
all,  with  the  Sanscrit  nanuis,  "present,  gift," 
as  Hitzig  attempts.  Ewald  prefers  "Syr'.,  ^^^ 
the  translation  of  this  term  by  official  stations, 
or  promoting  to  office  (for  which  he  refers  to  the 
old  Persic  and  also  to  chap.  v.  16)— which, 
however,  is  opposed  to  the  entire  body  of  exe- 
getical  tradition, — Therefore  shew  me  the 
dream,  etc.  1"b,  tlieref/re  (composed  of  the 
demonstrative  adverb  1~  and  the  preposition 
b),  is  found  in  this  signification  in  verse  9, 
and  chap.  iv.  24,  and  in  the  Hebrew  of  Ruth  i. 
1 3.  On  the  other  hand  it  signifies  ' '  but  rather  " 
in  verse  30,  and  "  but "  in  Ezra  v.  12. 

Verses  7-9.  Repeated  refvsnl  of  the  Chaldceans, 
and  rcneiced  threatening  of  the  king.  They 
answ^ered  again.  ri:^:ri,  an  adverb  from  I'^Pi 
"the  second  one,"  chap.  vii.  5. — And  we  will 
shew  the  interpretation,  irinn:  n^-.|:c^.  The 
form  nywQ  is  not  to  be  changed  into  """S,  aa 
Hitzig  suggests,  but  must  rather  be  regarded 
simply  as  a  Hebraized  stat.  emphat.  for  s-r  2,  jfst 
aa  (verse  5)  ~^^'r  is  used  for  ^\'^'^  (verse  8, 
etc.),  or  "ars  (chap.  v.  7,  15)  instead  of 
Stars  (ibid.,  verses  8,  16,  etc.).  Whether  the 
Hebraizing  orthography  apparent  in   this  and 


CHAP.  II.  1-49. 


other  similar  instances  is  to  be  placed  to  the 
account  of  Daniel,  and  to  be  considered  as  a 
peculiar  feature  of  the  Chaldee  in  his  time 
(Pusey,  Daniel,  p.  46).  or  whether  it  originated 
with  later  transcribers  of  Daniel's  text,  cannot 
he  definitely  decided ;  compare  Kranichf.  on 
this  passage. — Verse  8.  I  kno\^  of  certainty. 
n^S'^  1?:,  equivalent  to  QT-p  1^,  ex  verilate, 
assuredly,  verse  47. — That  ye  would  gain  the 
time;  literally,  ''that  ye ^wre/dwe  time  "  (Sept. 
and  Theodotion  :  Kaipbv  iiayo/ia^ere) ;  compare 
t^ayopa^ta^ai  vov  Kaipov^  Eph.  V.  16  ;  Col.  iv.  15  ; 
also  tempus  emere,  Cicero,  Ven:  I.  3.  The 
time,  i.e.,  the  favorable  juncture,  the  oppor- 
tuuitas,  which  the  magicians  sought  to  buy,  i.e. , 
to  improve,  consisted  in  the  fact  that  the  king 
had  forgotten  hia  dream  ;  they  aim  to  improve 
this  circumstance  in  such  a  way  a.s  eventually  to 
avoid  the  interpretation  altogether.*  Their 
design  is  therefore  properly  "to  gain  time," 
to  postpone  the  decision.  Thus  Gesen.,  De 
Wette,  Von  Leng.,  Hiivernick,  and  still  earlier. 
Luther,  are  correct:  "That  ye  seek  delay." 
Entirely  too  artificial  is  the  view  of  Hitzig  and 
Kranichf..  that  the  favorable  circumstances,  of 
which  the  magicians  hoped  to  avail  themselves, 
con.sisted  in  the  king's  desire  to  learn  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  dream  ;  and  that  they  specu- 
lated on  this  desire,  in  the  hope  that  the  king 
might  ultimately  be  persuaded  to  disclose  to 
them  the  dream,  etc. — Because  ye  see  that 
the  thing  has  gone  from  me  ;  rather.  "  that  my 
decree  is  published,"  i.e.,  because  ye  observe 
that  I  am  in  earnest  about  the  command  ;  com- 
pare verse  5.  "''1  ir;p"b3  does  not,  in  this  nor 
any  other  place,  not  even  in  chap.  v.  23,  signify 
"despite  that,"  as  Hitzig  suggests,  but  "be- 
cause," properly  "because  that,"  prajiterea 
quod.  The  king  evidently  aims  to  point  out  the 
motive  for  the 'artful  temporizing  and  delay  of 
the  magicians,  namely,  the  menace  with  which 
he  has  intimidated  and  frightened  them. — Verse 
9.  But  it  ye  will  not  make  know^n  .  .  .  the 
dream.  I"  ^1,  Heb.  CN  irs.  (/iiodn  The  ^li 
properly  "since,"  "therefore,"  takes  up  the 
subject  of  the  preceding  conditional  clause, 
and  pl.aces  it  in  emphatic  correlation  to  that 
clause  (Kranichf. ). — There  is  but  one  decree 
for  you;  i.i.,  one  and  the  same  sentence  of 
condemnation  shall  come  on  all  of  you  (Vulg. 
correctly,  una  est  de  vobin  senteiUia  ;  cf.  Luther, 
"so  ergeitt  das  Recht  iiber  euc/i").  r~,  the 
sentence  of  condemnation  in  this  passage,  is 
clearly  the  same  in  substance  as  H3'3  in  verses 
5  and  8;  the  suffix  plainly  indicates  this 
/lirr'1,  "your  sentence,"  i.e.,  that  which  comes 
upon  you,  which  concerns  you).  Von  Leng.  and 
Hitzig  (following  Theodotion)  are  wrong :  ' '  But 
one  thing  forms  your  object,"  ye  entertain  but 
one  design ;  for  r~  never  designates  a  subjec- 
tive personal  opinion  or  aim,  but  rather  always 

*  [But  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  supposed  circumstance 
that  the  king  had  fonjaittn  the  dream    can  here  be  called 

*' a  favorable  i/»ie.''     5<"IX  here  is  evidently  to  be  taken 

in  the  sense  <>f  delat/.  The  Ma'jians  are  charged  with 
trying  to  poBtpon**  the  matter  indefinitely,  by  the  plea  of 
requirintt  the  statement  of  the  dream  by  the  king  himself, 
which  they  presume  cannot  be  done.] 


an  objective  norm,  which  is  binding  on  the  indi- 
vidual.— For  ye  have  prepared  lying  and 
corrupt  words  to  speak  before  me.  ~Z~2, 
"falsehood,"  and  nrTl'i',  properly,  "corrup- 
tion," "baseness,"  are  in  apposition  with  "?'?• 
The  entire  object  is,  however,  placed  before  tha 
infinitive  l^'*??  which  governs  it,  on  account 
of  emphasis;  compare  verse  18;  iii.  16;  iv.  15. 
— The  principal  verb  is  "I^Pp^iTn  in  the  Kethib, 
the  Aphel  of  l^T.  This  form,  which  does  not 
occur  in  the  Chaldee  or  Syriac,  but  is  found  in 
the  Samaritan,  expresses  the  sense  of  "  conspir- 
ing" which  is  here  required,  as  weU  as  the 
Ithpa.  l^ri;^'?!'?  substituted  for  it  in  the  Keri 
(cf.  the  cviiiiirsxii:  of  Theodotion  and  the  corn- 
posueritis  of  the  Vulg.). — Till  the  time  be 
changed,  i.e.,  untU  by  the  aid  of  some  hoped- 
for  circumstance  ye  ascertain  something  more 
definite  concerning  the  subject  of  the  dream  : 
or,  also,  until  my  anger  ceases,  and  I  withdraw 
the  demand  altogether. — And  I  shall  know- 
that  ye  can  show  .  .  .  the  interpretation 
thereof.  The  future  ~::^n~K'  expresses  the 
idea  of  ability,  competency ;  compare  Winer, 
Gramm.,  ^  44,  3,  c.  (p.  107). 

Verses  10,  11.  The  magicians  attempt  to  eMah- 
iijih  their  declaration  respecting  the  impiossihiUty 
rif  gratifying  the  Icing's  de.firr.  Therefore  there 
is  no  king,  lord,  nor  ruler,  that  asked  such 
things;  rather,  "since  no  great  and  mighty 
king  (ever)  asked,"  etc.  '^'1  b2p";3  is  to  be 
taken  here,  as  in  verse  8,  in  its  usual  sense  of 
"since,"  not  as  drawing  a  conclusion,  in  the 
sense  of  "  wherefore,  for  which  reason  "  (Gesen., 
Von  Leng.,  etc.).  It  does  not,  indeed,  adduce 
the  actual  re.a.son  for  the  assertion  that  no  one 
could  satisfy  the  royal  demand  ;  but  it  refers  to 
the  subjective  ground  that  in  all  human  experi- 
ence, no  king,  however  great,  had  imposed  such 
a  demand.  Compare  the  similar  ^woiifit'o  a  pos- 
teriori, or  a  gnorismate,  in  the  familiar  passage, 
Luke  vii.  47. — The  predicates  C-S'ii  Z~  are  not 
empty  titles  after  the  manner  of  the  Orient 
(Berth.,  Von  Leng.,  Hav. ),  but  imply  that  while 
the  most  extreme  demands  might  be  expected 
from  precisely  the  mo.st  powerful  kings,  never- 
theless, etc — Verse  11.  Except  the  gods, 
whose  dwelling  is  not  (to  be  found)  with  flesh, 
or  "with  men."  "'I??,  fleali,  indicates  the  frailty 
of  created  man,  encompassed  by  earthly  limita- 
tions, as  contrasted  with  the  uncreated  and 
divine,  which  is  not  confined  within  these  per- 
ishable bounds ;  compare  Isa.  xxxi.  3 ;  Jer. 
xvii.  5;  Zech.  iv.  6;  Job  v.  4;  also  John  i.  14; 
1  Tim.  iii.  16,  etc.  The  Chaldajans  include 
themselves  in  the  term  flesh,  in  order  to  refer 
excusingly  to  their  imperfection  and  the  limita- 
tion of  their  knowledge,  as  in  no  wise  deserving 
of  censure. — The  fact  that  the  dwelling  of  the 
gods  is  not  with  men,  prevents  such  inter- 
course with  them,  as  would  admit  of  man's  in- 
struction in  their  superior  knowledge.  This  ia 
certainly  a  truly  heathenish,  but  not  a  specifi- 
cally Babylonian  thought  (as  Hiivemick  sup- 
poses). Von  Lengerke's  supposition  that  the 
king  must  already  at  this  juncture   have   re- 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


marked  the  prophetic  rank  of  Daniel  (cf.  Ex. 
viii.  15)  is  too  far-fetched.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  appeal  of  the  wise  men  to  the  gods,  becomes 
significant  for  the  progress  of  the  scene,  as  it 
might  suggest  to  the  king  the  consideration,  so 
damaging  to  themselves,  that  the  gods  could 
not  conceal  their  superior  knowledge  of  impor- 
tant secrets  from  them,  of  all  others,  who  were 
professional  priests,  in  case  they  were  not  pre- 
tended, but  real  priests  of  the  gods.  In  other 
words,  the  appeal  of  the  magicians  hastens  the 
denunciation  of  the  sentence  with  which  they 
had  been  threatened. 

Verses  12,  13.  The  decree  fm'  the  execution  of 
the  apjxyinted  penalty.  And  commanded  to 
destroy  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon ;  natur- 
ally only  those  belonging  to  the  capital  city, 
who  alone  are  to  be  regarded  as  summoned 
before  the  king  (verse  2) ;  not  tho.se  of  the  whole 
realm,  nor  even  of  the  province  of  Babylon 
(verse  49  ;  iii.  1).  Those  remaining  magicians, 
or  wise  men.  who  were  not  inhabitants  of  Baby- 
lon itself,  fonned,  according  to  Strabo  xvi.  1; 
Pliny.  H.  N.  vi.  26,  separate  colleges,  e.g.,  in 
Borsippa,  Urchoe,  Hipparenum.  They  differed 
ia  certain  principles  and  customs  from  the 
Babylonian  coUige,  as  well  as  from  each  other, 
and  therefore,  could  not  be  held  directly  re- 
sponsible for  a  mistake  or  a  crime  committed  by 
theb-  colleagues  in  the  capital. — Verse  VS.  And 
the  decree  went  forth.  ^'1,  the  decree  in 
proper  form,  the  firman  (cf.  ''o;//n,  Luke  ii.  1); 
compare  verse  9 — That  the  wise  men  should  be 
slain.  TJEpra  N'^7;''3n'l  probably  expresses 
no  more  than  this ;  the  form  of  the  imperf. 
partio.  Vitspr?:  seems  to  be  used  as  a  gerun- 
dive, "they  were  (persons)  to  be  slain,  devoted 
to  death  ;"  or — of  which,  however,  there  is  no 
other  example — the  ^  coupled  with  the  participle, 
seems  exceptionally  to  express  the  sense  of  de- 
sign: ''sapieiites  ut  interticerentur  "  (cf.  Kran- 
ichf.  and  Maurer  on  this  passage, the  one  of  whom 
prefers  the  former  explanation,  and  the  other  the 
latter).  The  execution  of  the  sentence  is  not  to 
be  regarded  as  having  actually  begun,*  as  ap- 
pears sufficiently  from  what  follows,  especially 
in  verses  14  and  24  (contra  Hitzig,  etc.). — And 
they  soustht  Daniel  and  his  iellow^s  to  be 
slain ;  evidently  because  they  were  regarded  as 
belonging    to    the    Vp'Sn    or    C^3':    in    the 

broader  sense,  which  could  only  be  the  case 
after  they  had  passed  the  examination  before 
the  king  mentioned  in  chap.  i.  19 — hence,  after 
completing  the  three  years  of  their  training.  It 
follows  from  this  that  the  event  here  recorded  did 
not  tran.spire  during  that  period  (cf.  on  verse  1), 
as  Wie.seler  holds.  At  the  same  time  the  state- 
ment before  us  indicates  that  Daniel  was  not 
entirely  unknown  to  the  king  at  this  time,  as 
might  appear  from  verse  25  et  seq.  The  fact 
that  Daniel  and  his  three  fellows  had  not  ap- 
peared in  person  before  the  king,  but  were 
sought  for,  is  easily  explained  by  the  considera- 

•  [Kl'U,  however,  insists  that  this  mnst  be  the  meaning  of 
the  pashive  participle  here,  and  renders  "the  woric  of  put- 
ling  to  death  was  begun."'  This  is  a  strnining  of  the  sense. 
Tlic  execution  being  ordered,  and  preparations  going  on  for 
It ;  it  waB  regarded  as  virtually,  but  not  actually  in  pro- 
gress.] 


tion  that  Nebuchadnezzar  did  not,  by  any  meana^ 
summon  all  connected  with  the  class  of  magi- 
ans  in  the  capital  before  him  (cf.  verse  2, 
where  Luther's  "  all  star-gazers  and  wise  men" 
is  decidedly  inexact),  but  assuredly  only  tba 
presidents  of  the  several  chief  classes,  the  nota- 
bles and  representatives  of  the  whole  body. — 
On  the  apologetical  significance  of  the  circum- 
stance that  Daniel  and  his  companions  seem,  in 
this  place,  to  be  at  least  connected  or  affiliated 
with  the  order  of  magians,  if  not  formal  mem- 
bers of  it  (as  Von  Lengerke,  evidently  going  too 
far,  supposed)  see  above,  Uogm.-eth.  considera- 
tiona  on  chap.  i. ,  and  also  Kranichf.  on  this 
passage. 

Verses  14-16.  Daniel  prevails  on  the  king  to 
delay  the  e.xecution  of  the  sentence.  Then  Dan- 
iel answered  with  counsel  and  wisdom  to 
Arioch,  etc.  -?^1  i^'^^y,  counsel andicindcnn,  i.e., 
words  of  counsel  (cf.  ~S5  Isa.  xi.  2 ;  Jer.  xxxii. 
19,  etc.)  and  of  wisdom,  namely,  as  concern- 
ing the  difficult  position  in  which  he  was  placed 
with  the  rest  of  the  wise  men,  and  in  regard  to 
the  proper  way  to  relieve  the  difficulty  (C5t?, 
ratio,  similar  to  chap.  iii.  12).  On -"^n  "to 
reph."  compare  chap-  iii.  IG;  Ezra  v.  11.  The 
connection  -72  Z''"  reminds  us  of  C^'U  ^S^"-'^' 

Prov.  xxvi.  16. — Thename  '^i'^",'?  occurs  as  early 
as  Gen.  xiv.  1 ,  as  the  name  of  a  king  of  Ellasar. 
The  leading  element  in  its  composition  seems 
to  be  n^is,  ■'"IS  =  Sanscrit  arja,  "  lord,"  and, 
possibly,  it  may  even  be  directly  identified  with 
the  Sanscrit  drjaka,  "  venerabilis."  This  per- 
son was,  therefore,  a  noble,  of  decidedly  Indo- 
Germanic  race,  filling  an  important  office  at 
Nebuchadnezzar's  court.  His  title  X^nae"1_, 
chief  of  the  slaughterers  (i.e.,  the  execution- 
ers), is  the  Shemitic  designation  of  the 
same  official  who  was  known  in  the  Ro- 
man empire  as  the  Prwfectuit  prwtoris, 
and  in  Turkey  bears  the  title  of  Kapidsjii-pasha, 
hence  a  chief  of  the  life  or  body  guards.  Be- 
sides the  execution  of  capital  punishments, 
warlike  functions,  up  to  those  of  a  commander- 
in-chief,  might  occasionally  be  devolved  on  this 
officer,  as  appears  from  the  instance  of  Nebuzar- 
adan,  2  Kings  xxv.  8  et  seq.  The  office  existed, 
however,  even  at  the  court  of  the  Egyptian 
Pharaohs  (see  D'HSan  Ti",  Gen.  xxxvii.  36  ; 
xxxix.  1 ;  xl.  3etseq. ).  His  extensive  influence 
at  the  Chaldfean  court  is  indicated  elsewhere 
than  here  (see  especially  the  predicate  "  the 
powerful  one  of  the  kmg,"  S3i??3-'T  ND'^d 
verse  15),  in  2  Kings  viii.  10 ;  Jer.  xxxix. 
9  et  seq,;  xl.  1  et  seq.;  xli.  10;  xliii.  6; 
Iii.  12  et  seq. — Verse  15.  Why  is  the 
decree  so  hasty  from  the  king? — rather,  "why 
this  furious  decree  on  the  part  of  the  king?" 
or  literally,  "why  the  decree  which  furious 
from  before  the  king?"  ncsn.-?;,  the  parti- 
ciple of  ^pin^'  which,  according  to  the  Targ. 
Prov.  vii.  13 ;  xxi.  29,  is  equivalent  to  '5r!' 
"  to  rage,"  is  here  in  the  stat.  abnul.  irstead  of 
eniphat.,  just  as  the  Hebrew  participle  when  is 
apposition  is  sometimes  without  the  article,  e.g  , 


CHAP.  II.  1-49. 


73 


Cant  xiL  0  ;  Am.  ix.  12  ;  Jon.  iv.  17.  Some, 
as  Havemick,  and  others,  prefer  to  translate 
"hurried,"  "  hastj,"  in  analogy  with  chap.  iii. 
29,  where  ns^rr;  seems  to  bear  that  sense  (?) ; 
but  the  ancient  versions  support  the  rendering 
*' furious,  raging"  (Sept.  rrtHfiu^^  Theodot.  iit'a- 
iSvc,  Vulg.  cniddis),  and  the  entire  situation 
substantiates  this  meaning. — The  writer,  how- 
ever, does  not  mention  everything  that  Daniel 
must  have  said  to  Arioch  on  this  occasion  ;  but 
rather  contents  himself  with  faintly  indicating 
that  only  which  seiwed  to  manifest  his  counsel 
and  wisdom.  The  author  employs  an  abbrevi- 
ated style,  as  in  chap.  i.  9.  10  (see  on  the  place); 
he  is  not.  therefore,  to  be  charged  with  incon- 
gruity (Hitzig),  nor  is  the  point  in  question  to  be 
strained  by  an  artificiallj*  interj>olating  exegesis, 
and  perhaps  (with  Kranichf. )  to  be  regarded  as 
particularly  surprising  and  remarkable. — Verse 
Itj.  And  Daniel  went  in,  namely,  to  the  king 
in  the  palace  (cf.  3  Sara.  xix.O),  naturally  not 
until  announced  by  Arioch  (cf.  verse  25^  for 
none  were  admitted  to  the  kings  of  the  E.ast 
without  such  announcement,  see  Esther  iv.  11  ; 
Herodotu.s,  I.,  99;  III..  110,  118.  Hence,  another 
abbreviating  statement  by  the  author,  as  also  in 
what  immediately  follows. — That  he  would 
give  him  time,  and  that  he  would  show  the 
king  the  interpretation — and  naturally,  first  of 
all,  the  contents  of  the  dream  itself.  He  hopes 
that  God  will  impart  both  to  him,  during  the 
respite  that  is  to  be  granted.  In  the  construction 
SSb'ab  ~^]nrib  S*"™?''  the  copula  is  explicative, 
"and  indeed,  to,"  etc.,  or  "  namely,  to,"  etc. 
The  change  of  construction  here  is  analogous  to 
that  in  chap.  i.  5,  where  the  verb  1^?1  first 
governs  a  simple  accusative  of  object,  and  after- 
ward a  telic  infinitive  clause   with    V  (C^'iail). 

Verses  17-19.  O'td  rerenh  the  secret  to 
Diiniel.  Then  Daniel  went  to  his  house — 
evidently  because  the  king  had  granted  the 
desired  respite,  which  must  be  assumed  in  verse 
li>,  without  further  question.  This  favor  will 
not  seem  strange,  nor  inconsequent  (Hitz. ), 
when  we  reflect  that  Daniel  and  his  three 
friends  bad  secured  the  favor  and  good-will  of 
the  king  but  recently,  on  the  occasion  of  their 
first  appearance  in  his  presence  (chap.  i.  19  et 
seq. ).  None  were  better  adapted  to  soothe  the 
angry  king  and  olitain  at  least  a  postponement 
of  the  impending  jiunishment,  than  the  hand- 
some and  richly  endowed  Hebrew  youth,  who 
had  already  made  so  favorable  an  impression  on 
the  monarch,  and  who  probably  would  have  ar- 
re.ited  the  publication  of  the  decree  of  punish- 
ment,had  he  been  among  those  magians  that  were 
summoned  before  the  king,  according  to  verse 
2  ;  compare  on  verse  18. — Daniel's  house  may 
probably  be  considered  as  an  ofiicial  or 
servant's  dwelling,  as  well  as  the  houses  of 
the  other  wise  men  mentioned  in  verse  5 ; 
and  moreover,  as  the  context  shows,  as  a 
residence  which  he  shared  with  his  companions, 
Hananiah,  etc — Verse  18.  To  desire  mercies 
of  the  God  of  heaven  ;  more  accurately,  "  nnd 
indeed  in  order  to  implore  mercies."  The  clause 
''.??'??  V^QIl  depends  on  the  last  preceding 
verb  5~in.  "he  Made  the  fiing  known  to  them;" 


I  hence  the  construction  is  the  same  as  in  verje 
16  b.  The  design  of  the  Jlin  was  to  imprjss 
I  the  exigency  on  tlie  prayerful  consideration  of 
his  friends,  and,  in  fact,  a  united  prayerful  con- 
sideration in  which  Daniel  himself  participated 
(cf.  verse  23).  That  the  execution  of  the 
design  to  pray  is  not  expressly  mentioned, 
and  that  we  have  merely  Daniel's  offering 
of  praise  after  the  secret  has  been  Divinely 
imparted  to  him,  instead  of  the  suppli- 
cation of  the  friends,  are  additional  illus- 
trations of  the  abbreviating  style  with  which 
our  chapter  abounds  1  cf.  verses  14  and  16).  A 
New-Testament  parallel  is  found  in  the  Johan- 
nean  narrative  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus,  John 
xi.  40,  41  et  seq.,  where  the  supplication  of 
Jesus  is  likew\pe  omitted,  and  only  his  thanks- 
giving after  his  grayer  is  heard,  is  recorded. — 
The  designation  of  Jehovah  as  the  "God  of 
heaven,"  which  occurs  as  early  as  Gen.  xxiv.  7, 
is  very  general  with  Old-Testament  writers 
after  the  captivity,  probably  in  contradistinction 
from  the  custom  of  the  Asiatic  Orientals  of 
deifying  the  several  stars  or  zodiacal  regions ; 
cf.  verses  19,  44;  Neh.  i.  5  ;  ii.  4 ;  Ezra  i.  2  ; 
vi.  10 ;  vii.  12,  21 ;  also  the  related  phrase 
"  King  of  heaven,"  chap.  iv.  34  (A.  V., verse  37), 
and  r^ri'acjTt/i;  oiyj.ai'ui',  2  Mace.  xv.  23.  In  general 
see  Havemick,  Theologie  dcs  Alteii  Texfnments, 
'id  ed..  p.  49. — Verse  19.  Then  was  the  secret 
revealed  unto  Daniel  in  a  night  vision. 
»;^-'.b-^'i  Hitri,  a«  well  as  nb-:b  n:T?n,   job 

iv.  13,  is  probably  not  a  dreamvmon,  but  a 
vision  generally,  and  properly  a  vision  seen 
by  night.  On  the  influence  of  night  to  promote 
the  higher  range  and  prophetic  elevation  of 
spiritual  meditation,  by  which  it  readily  arrives 
at  visions,  consult  Tholuck,  Die  Projiheten  nnd 
Hire  Weisangungen,  p.  52. — Compare  also  the 
dogmat.-eth.  deductions,  No.  2  [below]. 

Verses  20-23.  DanieV s  praise  and  thanksgiv- 
ing. Hitzig  observes  correctly,  "The  leading 
thought  which  Daniel  wishes  to  express  is 
placed  first,  verse  20  a  ;  next  the  exclamation 
is  justified  in  b.  by  the  attributes  which  belong 
to  God,  and  in  verses  21  and  22,  by  the  manner 
in  which  they  are  displayed  ;  finally,  verse  22 
shows  why  Daniel  felt  a  desire  to  utter  the  spe- 
cific thought  of  verse  20  a.  Those  attributes 
themselves,  verse  20  4,  return  in  verse  23  as 
belonging  to  Daniel,  conferred  on  him  by  God  ; 
and  thus  the  prayer  is  rounded  into  unity." 
—  [Daniel  answered  and  said,  "The  word 
n:"  retains  its  proper  meaning.  The  revelation 
is  of  the  character  of  an  address  from  God, 
which  Daniel  answers  with  praise  and  thanks  to 
God." — Keil.] — Blessed  be  the  name  of  God 
for  ever  and  ever.  The  form  S!)i7?i  like  the 
related  VH?.  II"""-?.  is  to  be  explained,  either 
by  assuming  that  the  particle  3  used  as  a  con- 
junction (that)  has  excluded  the  prefix  ^  (Ge- 
senius.  Abhandlung  ziir  hehr.  Gramm.,  p.  180- 
194),  or  that  the  preformative  ^  passes  over  into 
V,  as  in  the  later  Syriac  it  passes  into  i  (Beer, 
In.tcriptivnes  et  papyri  ret.  Semitici^  I.,  19  et  seq.; 
Maurer,  Hitz  ,  Kranichf.,  etc.).  The  latter  as- 
sumption seems  the  more  trustworthy.  On  tha 
phrase,  "  for  ever  and  erer"  (from  eternity  to 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


eternity)  compare  the  eimilar  doxologies,  Psa. 
rli.  14;  c%i.  48. — For  wisdom  and  might  are 
his.  This  is  almost  verbally  the  same  as  Job 
xii  13.  The  "''^  in  S*"n  n""''!  is  an  emphatic 
repetition  of  the  former  conditional  "l. — Verse 
31.  He  changeth  the  times  and  seasons. 
Theodotion  and  the  Sept.  correctly  render 
Katpjts-  Kul  ^^'poi'oiT,  for  which  Acts  i.  7  ;  1  Thess. 
V.  1,  have  the  inverse  order.  T15  is  time  in  gen- 
oral  ;  X?\,  the  determined  time,  the  appointed 
period  or  point  of  time.  Both  terms  are  also 
connected  in  chap.  vii.  12.  The  thought  that 
God  determines  and  conditions  the  change  of 
times  refers,  like  the  following  ( "  he  removeth 
kings,  and  setteth  up  kings"),  to  the  prophetic 
subject  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream- vision,  which 
had  just  been  revealed  to  Daniel. — He  giveth 
wisdom  unto  the  wise,  and  kno\(rledge  to 
them  that  know  understanding.  Although 
.  Daniel  includes  himself  among  these  wise  and 
understanding  ones,  and  even  has  special  refer- 
ence to  himself  while  mentioning  them,  he 
utters  no  offensive  sentiment,  but  expresses 
essentially  the  same  thought  as  St.  Paul  when 
he  writes,  "By  the  grace  of  God  I  am  what  I 
am  "( 1  Cor.  XV.  1 0).  He  traces  the  wisdom  and 
understanding  with  which  he  had  just  been  en- 
dowed back  to  its  Divine  source,  and  places 
himself,  as  the  bearer  of  such  wisdom  graciously 
bestowed  by  God,  in  contrast  with  the  heathen 
magians,  who  are  without  it. — Verse  23.  He 
revealeth  the  deep  and  secret  things,  etc. 
Compare  1  Cor.  ii.  10  ;  iv.  5  ;  Psa.  cxxxix.  12. 
— And  the  light  dwelleth  with  him,  has  made 
its  abode  with  him,  as  a  visiting  personage  of 
celestial  race ;  compare  the  Johunnean  ianiiiuaev 
:  r  i/uii'  of  the  Logos,  as  well  as  what  is  stated  in 
Prov.  viii.  30,  respecting  the  Divine  wisdom. 
S~w  (for  which,  with  Hitzig,  we  are  perhaps  to 
read  '*~'4')  's  often  used  in  the  Targums  instead 
of  n^:  or  p'f.  Instead  of  the  Kethib  S^V"". 
illuminatio,  intellectual  light,  the  Keri  has 
■"T'i":,  physical  light  (compare  perhaps  Psa. 
civ.  3 ;  1  Tim.  vi.  16).  The  Kethib,  however, 
Ls  sustained  by  the  corresponding  Syriac  word, 
and  .ilso  by  the  form  ^"^"^Hj,  chap.  v.  14.  — 
Verse  23.  God  of  my  fathers.  Daniel  addresses 
Jehovah  in  this  manner,  because  in  contrast 
with  the  idols  of  the  heathen,  he  has  just  re- 
vealed himself  again  as  the  same  true  God,  who 
was  known  to  the  patriarchs  of  his  nation. — 
Who  hast  given  me  wisdom  and  might ;  i 
namely,  wisdmn  in  regard  to  the  under.standing 
of  the  king's  dream  and  its  interpretation,  and 
strength  with  reference  to  the  danger  of  impend- 
ing death,  which  he  was  enabled  boldly  to  face. 
— And  hast  made  known  unto  me  now. 
"I't^.  the  Chaldce  ~~^'"!,  ''and  now,"  connects 
the  requisite  special  proof  with  the  general 
statement  just  made.  On  the  etymology  of 
"-•  probably  a  contraction  of  T!l?3,  "at  the 
time,"  .see  Gesenius,  s.  v. 

Verses  24-20.  T/ie  annoimcing  nf  Daniel  to 
the  king.  Therefore  Daniel  went  in  unto 
Arioch.     ,y  shows  the  direction,  like  the  He- 


brew bs  ;  cf.  chap.  iv.  31 ;  vii.  16.  The  He- 
brew, however,  also  employs  3?  occasionally  in 
this  sense,  e.g.,  2  Sam.  xv.  4. — He  went  and 
said  thi.s  unto  him.  The  ^y,  "he  went  in." 
which  is  cut  oif  by  the  insertion  of  a  lengthened 
clause,  is  resumed  by  ^I**  in  an  anacoluthic 
way. — Verse  25.  Then  Arioch  brought  in  Dan- 
iel before  the  king  in  haste.  n,r;2r'~3, 
"hastily,"  properly,  "  in  hasting;"  cf.  chap.  iii. 
24  and  liiT'^3,  Ezra  iv.   23,   which   has    the 

same  meaning. — The  form  i5"C  which  occurs 
also  in  chap.  iv.  4;  vi.  19,  neutralizes  (hke 
3''i:6!,  verse  9)  the  harshness  of  the  Daghesh 
(required  by  the  omission  of  a  radical)  by  the 
substitution  of  an  epenthetic ; ;  cf.  Winer,  §  19, 
1.  In  sense  b^-.'j  does  not  differ  from  b"n 
verse  24.  Concerning  Arioch  as  the  ticiQj'jf/l.fi's- 
of  Daniel,  see  on  verse  16. — I  have  found  a 
mztn  of  the  children  of  the  captivity  of  Judah 
(margin),  i.e.,  of  the  Jewish  captives.  Arioch 
here  certainly  speaks  of  Daniel  as  wholly  un- 
known to  the  king,  but  this  is  sufficiently  ex- 
plained by  the  conceited  pride  and  sovereign 
contempt,  with  which  he,  the  dignified  Indo- 
Germanic  (verse  14)  minister  of  police,  believed 
himself  compelled  to  look  down  upon  the  poor 
Shemitic  prisoner.  The  etiquette  of  the  Baby- 
lonian court,  so  to  speak,  and  particularly  of  its 
military  or  police  division,  forbade  the  leader  of 
the  body-guard  from  recognizing  Daniel  as  one 
known  to  the  sovereign.  The  compCer  can, 
therefore,  by  no  means  be  charged  with  men- 
tioning in  this  place  what  contradicts  his  former 
statements,  and  especially  with  having  already 
forgotten  the  fact  recorded  in  verse  16  (Hitz., 
Von  Leng. ).  The  manner  in  which,  for  instance, 
David  is  introduced  as  a  shepherd  totally  un- 
known to  Saul  and  Abner,  1  Sam.  xvii.  38,  55, 
might  much  more  readily  lead  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  narrative  there  did  not  originally  con- 
sist with  that  recorded  in  1  Sam.  xvi.,  which 
had  brought  David  into  closer  relations  with 
Saul  at  an  earlier  period  (cf.  even  Keil,  on  1 
iSam.,  p.  129  et  seq.,  who  admits  the  strangeness 
of  this  contradiction).  The  marked  difference 
between  the  discrepancy  in  that  case  and  the  far 
lighter  one  in  the  passage  under  consideration, 
shows  of  itself  how  little  reason  there  is  to 
assume  a  multiplicity  of  compilers,  or  even  a 

want  of  skill  on  the  part  of  the  sole  author 

Verse  26.  The  king  answered  and  said  to 
Daniel,  whose  name  ivas  Beltesbazzar.  This 
Babylonian  name,  which  the  king  himself  had 
caused  to  be  conferred  on  Daniel  (chap.  i.  7), 
would  naturally  be  the  only  one  to  claim  the 
notice  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  —  ["The  question. 
Art  thou  able  ?  t.  e. ,  '  Hast  thou  ability  ? '  does 
not  express  the  king's  ignorance  of  Daniel's  per- 
son, but  only  his  amazement  at  his  ability  to 
make  known  the  dream,  in  the  sense,  'Art  thou 
really  able  ?'  " — Keil.  ] 

Verses  37-30.  Introdvcteny  to  t/te  ttatement 
and  inierirretntion  of  the  dream.  The  secret 
.  .  .  cannot  the  wise  men,  the  astrologers, 
the  magicians,  the  soothsayers,  show  unto  the 
king.  (On  rt:D»  and  T'^rl'^.  ■*•  ^^-  "  astrol- 
ogers "   and    "magicians,"  see  on  chap.  i.  20.) 


CHAP.  II.  1^9. 


Concerning  the  T'T^,   "star-gazers,"  who  are 
for  the  first  time  expressly  mentioned  in  this 
place,   see  notes  on  verse  2.     The  word  (from 
~T3,  "to  cut  in,"   "incise;"  cf.   ~~ll^,,  chap.  iv. 
14)  primarily  denotes  "deciders,"  viz.  :  deciders 
of  fate,  dispensers  of  decisive  oracles  concerning 
the   fortunes  of  men,  hence  aHrdogers.     Com- 
pare  chap.    iv.   4  ;  V.   7,  11  ;  also  Isa.  xlvii.  13, 
from  which  passage  it  appears  that  the  office  of 
the    Babylonian   astrologers   was   not    confined 
merely   to   horoscopy,    but   extended    to  every 
kind  of  fortune-telling  founded  on  the  study  of 
the  stars.     The  Vulg.  haruspices  is  incorrect ;  for 
the  signification   of   the   Hebrew   (and   Arabic) 
~}3,  "  to  cut  in  pieces,"  is  foreign  to  the  Aram. 
"IJJ ;    and  haruspicy  as  a  specifically  priestly 
function  would  seem  rather  to   belong  to  the 
Chaldaeans.^Ver.se  28.  But  there  is  a  God  in 
heaven  that  revealeth   secrets.     These  words 
imply  the  total  inability  of  the  heathen  gods  as 
well  as  of  their  priests  and  wise  men,  to  reveal 
secret  things  ;  compare  Isa.  xli.  22  etseq.;  xliii. 
8;  xlviii.   o.   etc.;  Am.   iii.   7;   Hos.    xii.    11. — 
And  maketh  known  to  the  king  Nebuchad- 
nezzar— though    thiit  monarch  is   a   heathen; 
compare  the  instances  of  Pharaoh  (Gen.  xx.  3  et 
«eq. ;   xli.    16  et  seq. ),   Balaam   (Num.  xxii.    et 
■eq.),   the   E.astem  Magi   (Matt.   ii.  1   et  seq.). 
The  1  in  ~~^~':  is  explicative  or  particularizing, 
't   serves  to  introduce  the  transition  from  the 
ifeueral  truth  to  the  special  case  in  question. — 
What  shall  be  in  the  latter  days,    r-i-insa 
^'yZ^^  =  Heb.     =";^n    r^nnsa,  is  neither,  di- 
rectly and  without  qualification,   ''in  the  last 
time  "  (Hitzig),  nor  yet  "in  the  course  of  time, 
in  the  future"  generally  (Maur.,  Hiiv.^  but,  as 
everywhere  in  the  prophetic  language  of  the  Old 
Testament  (not  e.xcepting  Gen.  xlix.  1 ;    Num. 
xxiv.  14),    "in  the   Messianic  future," — in  the 
future  theocratic  period  of  salvation.     Kranich- 
feld  remarks  correctly :    "  The  writer  at  the  out- 
set of  his  prophetic  announcement  characterizes, 
by  the  use  of  s'^-ii  r'Tist",  the  whole  matter 
ts  in  relation   to    the  Messianic  destiny  of  his 
people." — Thy  dream,  and  the  visions  of  thy 
head.     "^r^"}.  ''".'n  (cf.   chap.   iv.   2,  7,   10;  vii. 
I )  here  designate  the  dream- vi.sions  of  the  king, 
not  because  they  were  begotten  by  his  he.ad  or 
brain  it  a  purely  subjective  manner,  but  because 
God  had  originated  them  in  connection  with  the 
meditations  of  his  head.     The  phrase  is  synony- 
mous with   "thy  dream,"   and  with  the  latter 
forms  a  hendiadys,  by  virtue  of  their  connection 
by  T  ;  the  plural  is  used  because  the   king  had 
seen  a  multiplicity  of  dreams  (cf.  verses  1,  2), 
but  is  subordinated  to  the  singular  ■^jQin  as  the 
leading  conception,  so  that   the  following  n3T 
K^r  is  exclusively  conformed  to  this ;  cf .  Winer, 
§  49,  G. — Verse  29.   As  for  thee,   O   king,  thy 
thoughts  came  into  thy  mind  (marg.  '•  came 
np  ")  upon  thy  bed,  i.e.,  presented  themselves, 
uncalled  for  as  it  were  ;  — a  strikingly  expressive 
personifying  phrase.     On  the  form  ^pis    com- 
pare chap.    iii.    8;    vi.    13;    Ezra  iv.    12.— The 
r?"'"'?'^,  ''thoughts,"  are  by  no  means  to  be  di- 


rectly identified  with  the  ' '  visions  of  thy  head  " 
in  the  preceding  verse  ;  they  are,  rather,  merely 
the  psychical  substratum  of  those  visions,  the 
natural  soil,  as  it  were,  from  which  the  Divine 
communication  sprang  forth  during  the  dream 
(correctly  Ephraem,  Maurer,Von  Lengerke,Kran- 
ichf.).  The  -^laab  '3i^J-l  at  the  close  of  th» 
following  verse,  again,  are  probably  something 
different  from  both  the  iiji^y-i  here  mentioned, 
and  from  those  "visions  of  the  head,"  They 
are,  most  likely,  as  the  context  indicates,  the 
di.squietiug  thoughts  which  occupied  the  king 
after  his  dream,  according  to  verse  1  (cf.  chap. 
V.  6).  The  pronoun  of  the  second  person  r;B3S 
(for  which  the  Keri  substitutes  the  later  form 
^:K),  which  precedes  in  the  nomin.-itive  absolute, 
is  repeated  by  the  suffix  in  '^!'3'i~3''i,  in  a  man- 
ner similar  to  that  by  which  the  introductory 
absolute  n:si,  "and  I,"  is  resumed  by  "0,  in 
the  next  verse  ;  cf.  the  same  construction,  chap, 
i.  *7. — Verse  30.  Not  for  any  wisdom  that  I 
have  more  than  any  living.  This  denies 
every  human  agency  in  the  imparting  of  such 
superior  knowledge  to  Daniel,  and  at  the  same 
time  refers  to  the  design  which  governed  it,  con- 
cerning which  the  latter  half  of  the  verse  is 
more  explicit. — But  for  the  intent  that  the  in- 
terpretation may  be  made  known  to  the  king 
(margm);  properly,  "that  they  should  make 
known  to  the  king."  The  indefinite,  impersonal 
plural  115-lin-|  (Winer,  §  49,  3)  was  probably 
used  with  design,  that  the  person  of  Daniel 
might  be  as  Kttle  conspicuous  as  was  possible, 
in  accordance  with  the  thought  in  the  former 
half  of  the  verse.     Compare  also  chap.  iv.  28. 

Verses  31-3.5.  The  mbject  of  the  dream, 
and,  more  immediately,  the  general  description, 
in  verse  31,  of  the  imnne  obsirred  by  the  king. 
Thou,  O  king,  rawest,  and  behold  a  great  image. 
"Sawe.st," — literally,  "  wa,st  seeing,"  wast  in  the 
condition  of  one  who  beholds  a  vision  ;  cf .  Winer, 
§47,  1.—  ^b^^,  "behold,"  isa  modification  of 
11^  (chap.  vii.  5,  6),  which,  according,  to  some, 
=  the  imperative  ;)ht,  "behold,"  but  seems  ra- 
ther to  be  a  pronominal  form  from  the  demonstr. 
"^^  —  ^s*  i  see  Hupfeld  in  the  Zeitschr.  fur 
Kiinde  des  Morgenl.,  II.,  1.33,163.  The  Talmud 
generally  substitutes  "'"H  for  either  of  these 
forms.— The  "image"  (=b?).  as  the  context 
shows,  designates  a  statue  in  the  human  form 
an  lii'Vi/nr  ;  also,  in  chap.  iii.  1;  cf.  Isa.  xliv. 
13.— This  great  image,  whose  brightness 
was  excellent.  In  the  Chaldee  the  words 
"this  image  great  and  its  brightness  magnifi- 
cent" are  inserted  as  a  parenthesis  into  the  sen- 
tence, "  and  behold  a  great  image  stood  before 
thee."  The  exceeding  brightness  of  the  image 
results  naturally  from  the  metals  which  compose 
it. — The  form  (rather  "  appearance  ")  thereof 
was  terrible ;  this  on  account  of  its  brightness 
as  well  of  its  greatness  ;  compare  Cant.  vi.  4. — 
Verse  32.  This  image's  head  was  of  fine  gold. 
Literally,  "this  image,  its  head,"  etc.  The 
position  of  the  absolute  **'?"??  ^<1^  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  sentence,  is  similar  to  verses  29,  30, 


76 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


and  verses  33  J,  37,  42,  etc. — The  stat.  constr. 
CSI)  ought  properly  to  be  repeated  before  ''1 
the  sign  of  the  genitive ;  cf.  vii.  7.  19  ;  also  Psa. 
xlv.  7;  Ezra  x.  13,  etc. — Verse  33.  His  legs 
of  iron.  On  T'Cl^i  "shanks,"  compare  Cant. 
V.  1.5. — His  feet  part  of  iron  and  part  of  clay  j 
literally.  "  of  them  of  iron,  and  of  them  of  clay." 
In  the  Kethib  the  masculine  suffix  is  appended 
to  the  partitive  l^i  V"''?  >  liten-ise  in  verses 
41  and  43.  The  Keri  employs,  in  each  of  these 
cases,  the  form  Vi^  which  the  fem.  b?"!  might 
lead  us  to  aspect,  but  which  must  probably  be 
regarded  as  an  easier  reading.  The  masculine 
suffix  in  "T^r^'  like  li'2n  in  verse  34,  for  ex- 
ample, and  like  the  suffix  i-j,i  in  chap,  vii  8, 
19,  must  either  be  regarded  as  a  common  gender 
(Hitzigi.  or  these  masculine  forms  must  be  ex- 
plained by  a  more  general  conception  of  the 
subject,  or  by  one  modified  according  to  the 
sense, — in  this  case  by  transferring  the  thought 
from  the  figure  to  the  fact  to  which  it  relates, 
i.e.,  the  conception  "foot"  to  the  other  idea 
"  kingdom,"  which  is  symbolized  by  it  (so  Kra- 
nichf.,  following  Ewald,  LeJirb.,-p.  784,  §  318,a). 
— Verse  34.  TUI  that  a  stone  was  cut  out. 
Naturally  a  stone  that  lay  on  the  side  of  a 
mountain,  from  whence  it  rolled.  This  stone 
enters  suddenly  and  unannounced  into  the  trans- 
action ;  as  often  happens  in  dreams. — With- 
out hands,  i.e.,  without  human,  but  solely 
through  a  supernatural  and  Divine  agency ;  com- 
pare vii L  25,  n^  2???i  also  Job  xxxiv.  20; 
Lam.  iv.  H;  Heb.  ix.  11. — Verse  35.  Then  was 
the  iron,  the  clay,  etc.,  broken  to  pieces  to- 
gether. ^pT  instead  of  ^p'1 ;  the  lengthening 
of  the  preceding  vowel  compensates  for  the 
-^"i'-  forte.  The  impersonal  subject  in  the 
plural  ("they  broke  in  pieces,"  cf.  verse  30) 
refers  to  the  invisible  supernatural  powers,  who 
effected  the  appearance  of  the  stone  itself  and 
the  consequent  destination.  The  several  compo- 
nent parts  of  the  image,  iron, clay, etc..  are  in  this 
place  recited  from  below  upward,  because  the 
stone  smote  and  crushed  the  feet  first. — And  be- 
came like  the  chaff  of  the  summer  threshing- 
floors;  hence  were  totally  demolished,  annihila- 
ted without  leaving  a  vestige.  Compare  Hos.  xiii. 
3  ;  Mic.  iv.  13  ;  Isa.  .xli  15,16  ;  Ivii.  13;  Psa.  i.  4; 
XXXV.  5;  Job.  xxi.  18.--And  the  slone be- 
came a  great  mountain.  •^^~,  moiiiitdiii,  is  the 
Heb.  -j^,  ruck.  On  the  hyperbolical  phrase 
"to  fill  the  whole  earth"  (not  merely  "the 
whole  land."  as  Van  Ess,  and  others)  compare 
John  xxi.  25,  and  also  the  apocryphal  parallels 
in  Fabric,  Cod.  Apocr.  N.  7'.,  I.,  331  seq.  The 
exaggeration,  however,  holds  with  regard  to  the 
figure  only,  not  to  the  symbolized  reality,  see 
verse  44. 

Verse  36.  Transition,  to  the  interpretation  of 
the  ilrciim.  We  will  tell  the  interpretation 
thereof  to  the  king.  'Tf*.'-  in  the  plural,  is 
used  because  Daniel  classes  himself  among  the 
worshippers  of  Jehovah,  all  of  whom,  as  such, 
have  access  to  the  mysteries  of  Divine  reve- 
lation. It  is  therefore  an  expression  of  modesty, 
similar  to  that  contained  in  verse  30.  [Daniel 
leems  specially  to  refer  to  hia  three  companions, 


who  had  been  associated  with  him  in  prayer  fol 
the  Di\'ine  aid  in  recovering  and  expounding 
the  dream,  verses  17,  18,  23.] 

Verses  37-45.  I'he  interpretation. — Thou,  O 
king,  art  a  king  of  kings.  S'^rbo  Tji?:,  the  gen- 
eral title  of  Oriental  sovereigns,  e.g..  accord- 
ing to  the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  among  the 
Persians  (cf.  Ezra  vii.  13);  among  the  Ethio- 
pians of  modem  Abyssinia  (Inscr.,  5138)  ; 
and  especially  among  the  Babylonians ;  com- 
pare Ezek.  xxvi.  7,  where,  as  here,  Nebu- 
chadnezzar is  termed  a  king  of  kings.  For  the 
rest,  the  form  "Thou,  OKing"  is  taken  np 
again  below,  in  verse  38  b,  by  S^n  np:H ;  for 
which  reason  S«'^?bO  T[b)p  is  reaUy  to  be  re- 
garded as  in  apposition,  and  the  period  extended 
to  the  close  of  verse  38 ;  for  verse  37  b  {'■'^,  to 
V"-^"'.)  ^  merely  a  relative  clause,  and  verse 
38  a  ('i'^'.^jI  to  TinbiB)  is  a  parenthetical  sup- 
plement to  it.*— The  God  of  heaven  hath 
given  thee  a  kingdom  (or  domimon),  power, 
and  strength,  and  glory.  For  the  connection 
of  the  relative  "'T  with  the  pronoun  of  the 
second  person  '^b,  compare,  e.g.,  Ecc.  x.  16.  On 
the  idea,  chap.  iv.  19;  v.  18.— Verse  38.  And 
wheresoever  the  children  cf  men  dwell,  etc. 
On  ^""-1^1,  "and  wheresoever,"  compare  the 
essentially  equivalent  "'CSta,  Judg.  v.  27 ;  Euth 
i.  17;  Job  xxxix.  30.  The  inserted  adverbial 
;3  strengthens  the  idea  of  the  relation,  as  in 
"1  brp-bS,  etc.— Instead  of  T'^H'l  "dweUing" 
(part  of  -,?,•::  ;  cf.  the  Heb.  -i-^,  "  race,  genera- 
tion ")  the  Keri  has  here  and  in  chap.  iii.  31 ;  iv. 
32 ;  vi.  26.  V^"^",  which  form  is  usual  in  the 
Targums. — Beasts  of  the  field  and  fowls  of  the 
heaven.  This  mention  of  the  animals  as  also 
subject  to  the  great  monarch,  serves  to  enforce 
and  strengthen  the  corresponding  statement 
with  reference  to  men  ;  similarly  Jer.  xxvii.  6  ; 
xxviii.  14 — which  passages  Daniel  probably  had 
in  view;  also  Bar.  iii.  16;  Judith  xi.  7,  etc. — 
["  Nebuchadnezz.ar's  dominion  did  not.  it  is  true, 
extend  over  the  whole  earth,  but  perhaps  over 
the  whole  ci\-ilized  world  of  Asia,  over  all  thn 
historical  nations  of  his  time  ;  and  in  this  sensn 
it  was  a  world-kingdom,  and  as  such,  ■  the  pro 
totype  and  pattern,  the  beginning  and  primary 
representative  of  all  world-po%vers '  (Klief. )." — 
Keil.  "  That  this  method  of  describing  exten- 
sive  dominion  was  common  to  the  Shemitic 
dialects,  is  evident  from  Gen.  i.  26  ;  Psa.  viii. 
0-8;  comp.  Heb.  ii.  7.  8."  — .Siimrt.]— Thou  art 
this  head  of  gold.  [In  S^n  np:K  the  »^T  is 
an  emphatic  copula,  as  in  verse  47.  "  It  carries 
a  kind  of  demonstrative  force  with  it,  like  that 
of  the  Greek  nirn-,  and  is  equivalent  to  I'hou 
art  the  very  or  that  same." — Stuart.     Strictly, 


*[Keil  takes  the  wime  view  of  the  cr>nstmction.  Commeii- 
tAiry,  p.  104.  The  rendering  of  the  whole  clause  would  then 
lie  as  follows;  *'Thon,  O  Kinp,  the  kinp  of  kings  (for  the 
God  of  heaven  hath  given  to  thee  the  kingdom,  the  power, 
and  the  strength,  and  the  glory:  and  wherever  the  suns  t.f 
nmn  dvve.I.  the  lleil^<t  of  the  field,  and  the  fowl  of  the 
heavens  hath  he  given  into  thy  hand,  and  hath  mule  the< 
ruler  over  ihent  allj — thou  art  the  baud  of  gold."'] 


CHAP.   II.   1-43. 


77 


the  clause  might  be  rendered,  "  Thou  art  it,  the 
head  of  gold,"  and  this  wonJd  yield  the  exact 
force  of  the  expression. ]  ReadHCS";  the  form 
nrx";  lor  H'.l'N"',  em  Hitzig  prefers)  seems  to 
have  been  taken  from  verse  .32.  StUl,  rwri 
verse  20,  might  perhaps  be  adduced  in  support 
of  this  readmg;  see  Hitz.  on  the  passage.  — The 
reason  why  Daniel  designates  Nebuchadnezzar 
himself  as  the  golden  head,  instead  of  his  king- 
dom, lies  simply  in  the  fact  that  the  first  (even 
though  he  were  yet  co-regent  with  his  father 
Nabopolassar )  gave  to  the  Chaldasan  empire  its 
glory  and  world-wide  greatness  and  importance ; 
80  that  he  could  not  only  be  considered  the 
founder  of  this  first  world-monarchy,  but  might  i 
also,  in  a  measure,  be  identified  with  it.  Espe-  ■ 
cially  might  this  occur  in  the  address  of  a  , 
speaker,  who  would  ex-officio  be  compelled  to 
magnify  his  fame,  because  he  stood  before  the 
king  in  person,  and  in  the  presence  of  his  court,  i 
How  easily  our  author  could  identify  a  realm  | 
(^zb?!)  with  its  sovereign  C^??)  is  shown  by 
chap.  vii.  17,  where  "four  kings"  is  almost  e.\-  j 
actly  synonymous  with  "four  kingdoms." — 
Verse  S'J.  And  after  thee  shall  arise  einother 
kingdom  inferior  to  thee.  5*".^  probably  does  i 
not  signify  "earthward,  toward  the  earth,"  as 
is  generally  assumed;  nor  can  we,  with  the 
Keri,  consider  5~»  as  an  adverb.*  It  may  be 
taken  instead,  as  a  easvn  adterbialis  from 
5T5  (  =  Heb.  i?"f"),  "a  low  object," — analo- 
gous to  the  adverbial  S*??,  "  above,  upward," 
from  I>,  "height,"  chap.  vi.  3;  and  as  there 
lina^  SiiS  signifies  "  higher  than  they,  above 
them."  so  here  "^J^p  ''f  "l**  may  mean  "  below, 
inferior  to  thee."  The  characterizing  of  the 
second  kingdom  as  inferior  to  the  first,  which 
Nebuchadnezzar  represented,  does  not.  however, 
relate  to  its  external  power;  for  it  is  cer- 
tainly also  conceived  of  as  a  world-controlling 
kingdom,  a  universal  monarchy,  as  appears 
abundantly  from  chap.  vi.  26.  Its  inferiority  to 
the  former  kingdom  can  only  consist  in  a  lower 
standard  of  morals,  as  also  the  third  and  fourth 
kingdoms  can  only  be  regarded  as  below  their 
immediate  predecessors  in  an  ethical  sense,  but 
not  physically  or  politically.  This  follows  with 
the  utmost  clearness  from  the  descending  grada- 
tion of  gold,  silver,  brass,  and  iron,  as  compared 
with  he  increasing  magnitudes  of  the  corre- 
sponding parts,  the  head,  breast,  belly,  and  legs 
of  the  image,  a  thought  which  lies  at  the 
foundation  of  the  whole  description  (cf.  on  verse 
40,  and  especially  Dogmat. -eth.  deductions. 
No.  3).  Considering  all  this,  it  seems  decidedly 
Kupertluous  and  inappropriate  to  refer  the  second 
kingdom  to  Belshazzar,  as  the  successor  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, and  reserve  the  third  for  Medo- 
Persia  ( Hitzig,  Heidelberg.  Jahrh.,  1832.  p.  131 
fE.,  and  Redepenning,  Stud,  und  Krit.,  1833,  p. 
863).     The  suffix  in  '^7v?  and  in  '^:'3  does  not 

*[Yet  the  author's  explanation  below   amounts  to    this 

Intorprctation  of  fci"*^^.    which   is    substantially    adopted 

bj  Geeenius  and  Fiirst  as    being  the  most  natural  and 
■groea  ^le  to  the  foim  of  the  word.] 


at  all  compel  us  to  assume  that  only  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's reign  is  designated  by  the  golden  head; 
and  that  therefore  the  breast  of  silver  must  re- 
fer to  his  successor  on  the  throne  of  Babylon- 
Daniel  probably  conceived  of  the  first  and  second 
kingdoms  as  monarchies  under  the  rule  of  a  suc- 
cession of  kings,  as  well  as  the  fourth  (see 
verses  -43,  44)  ;  and  the  courtesy  simply,  which 
he  was  obliged  to  observe  toward  the  great 
monarch  who  was  personally  before  him,  led 
him,  in  this  and  the  preceding  verses,  to  mention 
Nebuchadnezzar  only  as  the  representative  of 
the  first  kingdom  (see  above). — And  cmotber, 
third  kingdom  of  brass,  which  shall  bear  rule 
over  all  the  earth.  Its  ethical  inferiority  to 
both  its  predecessors  is  indicated  by  the  brass, 
while  the  relative  clause  »J1»t-br2  obin  ■'T 
(compared  with  verse  38  a)  seems  to  imply  that 
the  extent  of  its  power  should  even  exceed 
theirs.  It  may  be  remarked,  in  passing,  how 
clearly  this  indicates  the  Macedonian  world- 
monarchy. — Verses  40-43.  The  fourth  kingdom, 
corre»}wnding  to  the  fourth  bensl,  chap.  vii.  7  et 
seq. ,  and  like  it  signifying  the  divided  G^reek 
supremacy  under  the  successors  of  Alex,  the  great. 
The  fourth  kingdom  shall  be  strong  as  iron. 
On  the  relation  of  the  form  S*;^^r1  in  the 
Kethib,  which  is  analogous  to  the  usage  of  the 
Syriac,  to  the  purer  Chaldaic  Keri  ~^<y■'S■^  (here 
and  chap.  iii.  2.5;  vii.  7,  23),  see  Kranichfeld  on 
the  passage.  The  following  explains  the  mean- 
ing of  the  predicate  "strong  as  iron. — Foras- 
much as  iron  breziketh  in  pieces  and  subdueth 
all  thingsj  rather,  "  crusheth  all  things." 
^■^  b:p"b3  is  clearly  not  to  be  taken  in  its 
usual  signification,  "since,"  but  comparatively, 
"Justus;"  compare  chap.  vi.  H.  The  opinion 
that  it  stands  here  in  its  usual  sense  as  =  be- 
cause (Kranichf. ,  etc.),  is  oppo.sed  by  the 
Athnach  imder  the  preceding  Stbl"]E3,  which 
shows  that  "  to  break  in  pieces  and  crush  every- 
thing "  is  not  merely  stated  to  be  a  constant  pro- 
perty of  iron,  but  has  its  application  to  the 
nature  of  the  fourth  kingdom.  [Red  labors  at 
length  to  sustain  this  iUatire  rather  than  Ulustra- 
tire  sense  of  ""I  Zi;?"-2,  but  the  arguments  on 
both  sides  are  very  trivial,  and  the  difference  is 
not  important.] — As  iron  that  breake'.h  in 
pieces  all  these,  shall  it  break  in  pieces  and 
bruise.  The  rr-iJi-^T  sbT-.2r^  is  no  "offen- 
sive and  dragging  repetition  of  the  already 
completed  comparison,"  but  rather  serves  to 
powerfully  emphasize  the  iron-like  destructive 
character  of  the  fourth  kingdom.  The  hardness 
and  firmness  of  iron,  however,  and  still  more  its 
solidity  and  durability,  are  not  involved  in  the 
comparison,  so  much  as  its  destructive  power,  as 
appears  from  the  multiplication  of  verbs  that 
express  the  idea  of  destroying  {'r>'\r[,  to  diride. 
bTn,  to  crush,  j;^,  to  break  in  pieces- -the  first 
and  last  of  which  are  repeated).  Vbs'bS, 
"  all  these,"  an  individuahzing  resumption  ol 
the  more  general  sbs,  does  not  belong  to  the 
relative  clause  JJ-^.);— 'T  HbT-iCri  (Kranichf), 
but  to  ?1~1  P~P,  which  verbs  would  otherwise 
stand  too  disconnected  at  the  close  of  the  verse. 


iS 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


There  is  nothing  suspicious  in  the  fact  that,  by 
this  construction  a  breaking  to  pieces  of  "all 
these," — i.e.,  the  materials  already  mentioned, 
gold,  sUver,  etc. — by  the  fourth  kingdom,  is 
stated  ;  for  it  does  not  assert  the  destruction  of 
all  former  kingdoms  m  such,  but  only  the  in- 
creasing diminution  and  shattering  of  their  poli- 
tico-ethnological material  The  passage  thus 
merely  represents,  in  general,  the  separating  and 
destructive  influence  which,  naturally  to  its  own 
injiiry,  emanates  from  the  fourth  kingdom. 
The  way  is  thus  paved  for  the  description  which 
follows,  of  the  divisions,  internal  confusion,  and 
weakness  of  that  kingdom  (verses  ^\-i'A).  — Verse 
41.  And  whereas  thou  sawest  the  feet  aai  toes, 
part  of  potter's  clay.  I'i"?'?  as  in  verse  33. 
The  addition  of  inS"'^,    "  of  the  potter,"  to 

^pn>  "clay,"  strengthens  the  conception  of 
weakness  and  lack  of  power  which  is  implied  in 
that  term.  The  same  idea  results  from  the 
genitive  combination  St:"'13  C]Cn,  "  miry  clay, 
potsherds."  which  occurs  at  the  end  of  the 
verse ;  it  designates  the  finished  work  of  the 
potter  (Vulg.  testa),  which,  as  sherd,  is  capable 
of  being  easily  broken. — The  kingdom  shall  be 
divided,  i.  e. ,  a  kingdom  that  contains  in  itself 
the  principle  of  an  increasing  disruption  and 
self-division.  The  dual  number  of  the  legs, 
which  might  have  been  made  to  indicate  such 
division  (especially  if  the  colossus  were  con- 
ceived as  standing  with  widely-extended  legs), 
is,  evidently,  not  regarded  by  the  composer. 
Nothing  but  the  mixture  of  iron  and  clay  forms 
the  symbol  of  division  in  his  view ;  and  this 
mixture,  according  to  him,  pertains  only  to  the 
feet,  and  does  not  extend  to  the  legs,  which  are 
represented  in  verse  33  a,  as  composed  entirely 
of  iron.  This  indicates  that  the  division,  al- 
though its  principle  was  inherent  in  the  iron- 
kingdom  (see  on  the  preceding  verse),*  should 
only  be  thoroughly  manifested,  and  its  ruinous 
consequences  become  apparent  in  the  course  of 
the  development  of  thi.s  kingdom ;  facts  which 
were  verj-  fuDy  realized  in  the  history  of  the 
Macedonian  empire  after  Alexander,  whose  rulers 
endeavored  to  maintain  the  unity  of  the  realm 
down  to  the  battle  of  Ipsus.  although  engaged 
in  many  conflicts  and  bloody  quarrels  with  each 
other,  and  which  only,  from  the  period  of  that 
event,  permanently  dissolved  into  a  number  of 
kingdoms  (originally  four,  from  which,  how- 
ever, a  constantly  increasing  number  of  smaller 
independent  states  was  developed).  Compare 
infra. — But  there  shall  be  in  it  of  the  strength 
of  iron.  Luther  renders  "of  the  iron's  pltint," 
corresponding  to  StSS"':  in  the  Targums,  and  to 
the  Syr.  nezbeto  (of.  also  Theodot.  inrii  rfjc  pit^T/r, 
and  Vulg.  :  de  plantaris).  But  S*"'???  is  pro- 
bably derived  from  -2";  in  Pa.  "  to  fortify, 
strengthen," — and  therefore  to  be  rendered 
firmness,  strength  (cf.  -"'2'^,  firm,  certain,  vs. 
ti  and  45  ;  also  chap.  iii.  24  ;  vi.  13,  etc.),  rather 
than  from  -?:,  to  plant. — Verse  42.  And  as  the 


toes  of  the  feet  -were  part  of  iron,  and  part  ol 
clay.  The  nominative  which  precedes  is  really 
disconnected  (cf.  verse  32),  but.  since  it  is  in 
comparison  with  the  latter  half  of  the  verse, 
"as,"  or  "  just  as,"  it  may  properly  be  supplied. 
The  composition  of  even  the  toes  out  of  the  fatal 
mixture  of  iron  and  clay,  indicates  the  weakness 
of  the  feet  which  support  the  great  colossus, 
despite  the  fact  that  iron  enters  into  its  con- 
stitution throughout,  as  a  principal  element. 
i  That  Daniel,  while  mentioning  the  toes,  already 
refers  to  the  ten  kings  of  the  Seleucidce,  who 
are  represented  later  I  chap.  vii.  7,  24)  as  the  ten 
horns  of  the  fourth  beast,  cannot  be  certainly 
shown.  At  any  rate,  he  follows  this  thought  no 
further,  as  will  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  while 
he  mentions  the  toes,  he  does  not  premise  their 
tenfold  number  (cf.  Hitzig  on  this  passEige, 
against  Hengstenb.,  p.  211.  The  latter  clearly 
forces  the  symbol  of  the  toes  too  far). — So  the 
kingdom  shall  be  partly  strong,  and  partly 
brittle  (margin).  Concerning  r^p  ■?:,  "chiefly, 
partly,"  see  on  chap.  i.  2. — Verse  43.  They  shall 
mingle  themselves  'with  the  seed  of  men;  i.e., 
the  several  kingdoms,  or  rather  their  rulers,  shall 
seek  to  establish  harmony  by  means  of  marriage 
and  voluntary  relationship  (hence  in  this  way  of 
sexual  propagation).  *  On  the  expression,  com- 
pare Jer.  xxxi.  27 ;  on  the  subject,  chap,  xi  6 
et  seq.  and  17,  where  the  prophet  enters  more 
fully  into  the  subject  here  referred  to,  of  the 
adoption  of  the  marriage  policy,  and  of  its 
failure. — But  they  shall  not  cleave  one  to  an- 
other, even  as  iron  is  not  mixed  w^ith  clay ; 
properly,  "does  not  mingle  itself  with  clay." 
The  reflexive  Ithpaal  of  -""  designates  the 
process  of  mixing  or  uniting  itself,  whde  the 
Pael,  employed  above  in  verse  41  b,  expresses  a 
passive  sense.  This  involves  the  idea  that  the 
elements  of  iron  and  clay  might  be  externally 
mixed,  but  could  not  be  internally  united, 
because  their  qualities  do  not  blend,  i.e.,  they 
contribute  nothing  themselves  to  their  coherence 
and  permanent  union. — Verses  44,  4.5.  I'lu  fifth, 
or  Messianic  kingdom.  And  in  the  days  of 
these  kings ;  hence,  while  these  kings,  the 
Seleucidse,  Lagidse,  and  the  other  Diadochi,  are 
still  reigning ;  and  therefore  not  without  being 
involved  in  strife  and  conflict  with  them  :  cf. 
b,  and  chap.  vii.  13,  2.5  et  seq.  ;  viii.  10  et  seq.  ; 
ix.  24  et  seq. — Shall  the  God  of  heaven  set  up 
a  kingdom.  On  "God  of  heaven,"  compare 
on  verses  18  and  37.  The  highest  and  only  true 
God  appears  there  as  the  originator  and  supreme 
lord  of  fill  kingdoms  (cf.  verse  21 )  ;  but  this  fifth 
and  last  kingdom  alone,  is,  in  the  fuU  sense  of 
the  word  and  with  unqualified  truth,  a  kingdom 
of  specifically  divine  and  heavenly  character 
This  implies  its  miraculous  origin  as  well  as  its 
never-ending  duration. — The  kingdom  (rather, 
"its   dominion"!)   shall  not  be  left  to  other 


*  ["  3bC  alwayB  in  Hebr.,  nnd  often  in  Chald..  sipnifies 
thf  unnatural  or  violent  division  arising  from  inner  UOtnar' 
miini/  III-  illKcurJ  :  i:f.  Gen.  x.  a"i:  Psa.  iv.  10  :  Job  xxx-iTli. 
25;  and  LeriK' ,  C'lald.   Worlerb..  s.  \.—Kell.l 


*  [Keil,  however,  contends,  with  Klicf.,  that  the  mixina 
is  not  solely  nor  properly  on  the  part  of  the  kings,  but  ii 
only  spoken  of  the  vain  efforts  of  the  heterogeneous  elementB 
of  the  fourth  kingdom  to  coalesce  bj*  juxtaposition  or  even 
by    intermarriage  among  themselves,      'i  he   general  char 

acter  of  1*il")"n?C,  and  especially  the  fact  that  'to  gubjea 

for  it  is  expressed  in  the  text,  favor  the  opinion  that  both 
references  are  intended,  namely,  to  the  rulers  a-s  well  as  the 
people.] 
t  [The  authorized  rendering,  however,  is  correct,  if,  wit* 


CHAP.  n.  1^9. 


79 


people.     This  had  occurred  at  the  end  of  each 
of  the  former  kingdoms ;   compare  Ecclus.  x.  18. 
The  ce.ssation  of  such  transfers  of  dominion  cir- 
cumscribes the  idea  of  eternal  duration  in  a  re-  ; 
alizing   manner.     The   term  ^-?P  in  ""'l-r?^  j 
is  evidently  no  longer  used  in  the  same  sense  as  I 
before,    but    signifies    "dominion,"     "govern- 
ment."    The  suffix  does  not  refer  to  the  God  of  i 
heaven  as  the  founder  of  the  kingdom  (Theodo- 
tion,  ;)  lianu-tin  avroij,  but  to  the  kingdom  itself,  j 
— It   shall   break  in   pieces  and  consume  all 
these  kingdoms.      IlOri  is  literally,  "  and  bring  j 
to  an  end  " — annihilate  them.     The  Divine  king- 
dom is  not  merely  to  destroy  the  fourth  world- 
kingdom,  but  also  the  three  that  preceded   it, 
inasmuch  as  all  had  been  incorporated  with  the 
former ;    which  is  sho\vn  by  the  figure  of  the 
stone  that  crushes  the  legs  of  the  colossus,  and 
thereby  destroys  the  whole  image.     All  these  [ 
kingdoms  are  thus  described  as  arrayed  in  hostile  [ 
opposition  to  the  divine  kingdom,  and  as  objects 
of  its  destructive  influence  ;    but  this  does  not 
prevent  the  existence  of  certain  gradations  in  I 
their  hostility  to  God  and  in  their  untheocratic 
tendencies;    nor  that,   for  instance,  the  golden 
head  (Babylon)  and  the  breast  of  silver  (Medo- 
Persia)  show  greater  favor  and  ethical  approxi- 
mation   to     God's     people,    than    the    brazen 
belly,  etc.     Compare  supra,  on  verse  39 — Verse 
45.  Forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  that  the  stone 
was  cut  out  of  the  mountain,  etc.      "'T  b^p'iS 
is  employed  here  as  in  v.  40,   in  a  comparative 
sense,    like  "'r?^?,    "accordingly,"    or    "foras- 
much."    From  this  usage  results  a  closer  con- 
nection of  the  former  half  of  this  verse  (as  far  as 
'*r^ni)  with  what  precedes  it.     The  somewhat 
loosely  connected  and  abrupt  position  which  the 
second  period,  beginning  with  2"i   ^^^t,  is  thus 
made   to  occupy,  need  not  deter  us  from  this 
construction    (against    Hitzig    and    Kranichf.), 
which  was  employed  by  all  the  old  translators 
(and  also  by  Luther,  Dereser,  Von  Leng. ,  Maur., 
etc.). — On  the  subject  compare  Matt    xxi.  44; 
Luke  XX.   18,   where   Jesus   clearly    refers   this 
Messianic  prophecy  to  him.self  and  his  kingdom. 
— The    (rather    "a"j    great   God    hath  made 
known  to  the  king,  etc.      "  A  great  God,"  says 
Daniel,  because  he  desires  to  refer  to  the  infinite 
power  of  that  God,  who  is  not  only  able  to  dis- 
close    wonderful     revelations     respecting     the 
future,  but  also  to  bring  his  promises  to  pass. 
The  mode  of  expression  is  not  exactly  poetical, 
as  Kranichfeld  supposes,  but  generalizing.     But 
compare  S«3"!  S^nj*^,  with  the  article,  Ezra  v.  8. 
[On  the  contrary,   Keil   more   justly   remarks, 
"That  ;i  .Tj^jt  means,  not  'a  (undefined)  great 
God,'  but  t/ie  great  Ood  in  heaven,  whom  Daniel 
had  already  (verse  28)  announced  to  the  king  as 
the  revealer  of  secrets,  is  obvious."     The  sign 

most  editions  of  the  Masoretic  text,  we  read  nn^3b?a^,  as 

the  emphatic  sraie  simply ;    but  if  with  others,   we  read 

nrt^S^^I,  as  the  stijrixed  state,   we  mast  translate  its 

realm  or  dominion.    We  may  adduce,  as  an  objection  to 

'he  latter,  such  a  variation  in  the  sense  of  n^D^TS  in  the 

lame  verse,  as  well  ait  the  unusual  and  somewhat  tauto- 
ofdcal  application  of  the  pronominal  suffix  to  ita  own  noun 
as  an  antecedeut,  i,^.,  tfic  kingdom'^  kingdom.] 


of  definiteness  (us  the  art.  in  Heb.)  is  omitted 
on  the  general  principle  that  the  construction 
by  a  qualifying  adjective  renders  the  term  suffi- 
ciently definite,  inasmuch  as  there  could  be  no 
doubt  what  deity  is  referred  to.] — What  shall 
come  to  pass  hereafter.  M;"!  '''l.ns,  "after 
this,  hereafter,"  refers  specially  to  the  time  of 
Daniel  and  Nebuchadnezzar  ( cf .  v.  29 ),  and  not 
merely  to  the  incident  in  the  former  half  of  the 
verse,  as  Hitzig  contends,  in  order  to  find  here 
an  additional  trace  of  the  composition  of  this 
book  in  Maccabsan  times. — And  the  dream  is 
certain,  and  the  interpretation  thereof  sure. 
This  is  an  emphatic  affirmation  at  the  close  of 
the  truly  prophetic  character  of  the  dream  and 
of  the  interpretation  that  had  been  submitted. 
The  predicate  2''2'^  with  6<'9rn  hardly  refers, 
as  Kranichfeld  supposes,  to  the  fact  that  the 
king  had  forgotten  the  particulars  of  his  dream, 
and  now  recovered  them  accurately  and  per- 
fectly. It  is  better  to  hold,  in  harmony  with 
the  preceding  context,  that  Daniel  aims  to  set 
forth  the  trustworthiness  and  prophetic  force  of 
the  dream,  as  he  afterward  certifies  the  correct- 
ness of  the  interpretation  by  T?'^C"?>  "  faithful, 
trustworthy." 

Verses  4(5-49.  T/ie  influence  of  Daniel's  inter- 
preUition.  Then  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar  fell 
upon  his  face,  and  worshipped  Daniel.  Evi- 
dently T?P  does  not  here  signify  a  mere 
—poaKivr/aic,  such  as  was  sometimes  offered  to 
men  (cf.  Gen.  xxxiii.  7  ;  2  Sam.  xxv.  23 ;  1  Kings 
i.  16;  Est.  iii.  2),  but  rather  a  properly  divine 
adoration  (/ar/jfia),  as  is  shown  by  the  connected 
religious  acts  of  sacrifice  and  burning  incense. 
This  he  offers  to  Daniel  as  a  great  prophet  of 
the  highest  God  (see  v.  47),  and  not  because  he 
considered  him  a  god  in  human  form,  as  the  in- 
habitants of  Lystra  regarded  Paul  and  Barnabas 
(Acts  xiv.  13  et  seq. ).  For  this  reason  the  course 
of  Daniel  is  unlike  that  of  the  apostles  on  the 
latter  occasion.  He  no  more  rejects  the  homage 
of  the  heathen  king,  than  did  the  high-priest 
Jaddua.  when  Alexander  the  great  bowed  him- 
self to  the  earth  before  him,  in  order  to  honor 
the  God  of  Israel  (Josephus,  Anti.  XI.  8,  5) ;  at 
any  rate,  he  has  not  definitely  recorded  that  he 
protested  against  it  and  pointed  from  himself, 
the  human  instrument,  to  his  God — which 
might,  however,  be  explained  on  the  ground  of 
his  abbreviating  style  (cf.  on  v.  15  et  seq.). 
[We  must  not  forget  that  Daniel  had  already  ex- 
plicitly disclaimed  before  the  king  the  posses- 
sion of  supernatural  powers  as  of  himself  (verse 
36),  and  had  repeatedly  ascribed  foreknowledge 
to  God  alone  (verses  28,  45).  ]  The  opinion  of 
Geier,  Calov,  and  others,  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
merely  worshipped  in  the  presence  of  Daniel, 
without  addressing  his  homage  to  the  prophet 
( — as  if  3  T30  were  synonymous  with  DTp  0  ), 
must  be  rejected  ;  and  no  less  the  assertion  of 
Hitzig,  that  the  objective  aim  of  the  Maccabaean 
compiler  is  again  betrayed  in  this  instance,  by 
the  "highly  improbable  behavior  of  the 
king"  (!  V).* — And     commanded    that    they 


*  Porphyry  early  took  offence  at  this  passage,  but  hifl 
objection  was  properly  dispatched  by  Jerome  in  a  pointed 
manner:    '^  Hunc  locum  calumirutiur  Forphyriua,  qitM 


50 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


should   ofifer  an  oblation   and  sweet  odours 
unto  him.     "CD,  in  the  Pael  ' '  to  pour  out,  deal 
out,  lihare  "  (not  "  to  dedicate,  offer,"  as  Hitzig, 
with  au  unnecessary    reference    to  the   corre- 
sponding Arabic  verb,  prefers),  is  zeugmatic  in 
this  place,  and  relates  not  only  to  the  bringing 
of  the  f'H^rs,  "meat-offering,"  which  included 
an  aotuaHi'Aacc,  but  also  the  "p'7n''3,  8.«.,sweet- 
smelUng    savors,    offerings     of   incense,    which 
were  connected  with   all   meat-offerings.     The 
offering  of  incense,  therefore,  which  was  really 
implied  in  the  nn:!a  (Lev.  ii    1,   15,  etc.),  is 
again  explicitly  noticed,  in  like  manner  as  the 
r"t3f3  is  specially  mentioned  beside  the  ni;  and 
the  "H?'?,   in  Ex.  xxx.  9.     On  the  term  Hini; 
(literally    "  satisfaction,    pleasantness "),    here 
used    eUiptically    without  Hi-i,    which    is   con- 
stantly joined  to  it  in  the  Hebrew  (cf.   Ezra  vi. 
10,    Cbaldee  text),   see   Gesenius-Dietr.    in  the 
Hnndicijrterbi/ch, — The  tropical    conception    of 
the  offering  of  sacrifice  and  incense  as  a  purely 
civic  testimonial    of    honor    (Bertholdt)  is   de- 
cidedly improper,  and  leads  to  a  rationalizing  of 
the  passage  hostile  to  both  the  language  and  the 
context.       Compare    the    well-known    Persian 
custom  of  offering  sacrifices  to  kings  as  the  repre- 
sentatives of  Ormuzd,  which  is  mentioned  in  Cur- 
tius,  VIII.  .5,  6  ;  VI.  6,  2  ;  Arrian,  VI.  27 —Verse 
47.  Of  a  truth  it  is,  that  your  God  is  a  God  of 
gods.    On  CICp'Ifp  see  above,  on  v.  8  ;  compare 
Dio'pa,  Judg.  ix.    15  ;    also  Jer.   xxii.   13.— "iT 
stands  emphatically  before  the  remark,  similar 
to  liTi  in  the  Greek,  but  has  greater  significance 
than  the  latter.      "God  of  gods"  does  not,  in 
the   mouth   of    the    heathen    Nebuchadnezzar, 
designate  the  only  true  God  (Von  Leng.),  but  the 
mightiest   of   all   gods.     The   phrase   here   ex- 
presses a  different  sense  from  chap.  xi.  3(3  ;  Psa. 
cxxxvi.  2;   Deut.    x.    17. — Verse   48.   Then  the 
king  made  Daniel  a  great  man.     ■'3"1  the  Pael 
of  "3"',  "  to  become  great"  (chap.  iv.  8).  hence, 
"  to  make  great,  exnltare."     ["  It  is  more  fuUy 
defined  by  the  following  clauses. " — Keil.\ — And 
made  him  ruler  over  the  whole  province  of 
Babylon ;  not  as  Von  Leng.  supposes,  over  the 
whole  kingdom,  but  simply  over  the  province, 
'<;"'l':,  therefore,   as  in  chap,  iii  2.      The  be- 
stowal  of  a  formal  governorship  or  satrapy  is 
not  implied  in  the  verb  ♦-brst  here,  or  in  v.  38. 
What  really  was  conferred  on  the  prophet,  was 
probably  merely  a  decisive  influence  over  the 
administration  of  the  province  of  Babylon,  as  is 
illustrated   by   v.   49.      [StiU  this  civil  appoint- 
ment, in  distinction  from  the  literary  or  profes- 
sional one  immediately  added,  was  tantamount 
to  an  official  position  as  recognized  vice-regent 
ever   the   province    in   which   the    capital   was 
situated.] — And  chief  of  the  governors  over  all 
the  wise   men   of   Babylon.      l^:3D"'i  still 


tmmquam  superttUHmwi  rex  capuvum  adoraverit :  quasi 
noil  et  J.yraouen  ith  Hiffnoruvi  magnitudinem  Paulo  et 
It'll  nabfv  ntiliierbu  hoHlas  immolare.  Krrm-  ergo  Gen- 
titium^  qui  omnt  quoil  supra  se  e^t  DeoH  putaJit,  Scrip- 
lur<K  nou  debet  iviputare,  qum  iiinpUcUer  re/ert  univerta 
V^im /letita  Hunt.^* 


depends  on  riKbzn,  which  verb  therefore  zeng. 
matically  designates,  first  his  elevation  to  politi- 
cal power,  and  then  to  the  dignity  of  chief  priest. 
150  (related  to  i^zc,  periclitari,  tentare,  in  the 
Heb.  vtiUtati  esse,   offlcia  praestare ;   cf.   ItCi 
minister)  is  equivalent  to   ' '  business-manager, 
president,  overseer;"  a  T':3y~n  is  therefore  a 
superintendent  or  chief  prefect,  and  the  "Eab- 
Signin  over  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon  "  ac- 
cordingly seems  to  have  been  identical  with  the 
3a"i'1  or  "chief  magian "    mentioned   in   Jer. 
xxxix.  3.     On  the  probable  identity  of  the  terms 
TiaiSn  and  t3-'3n:  and  the  relation  of  both  to 
^"'Ir?,  see  above   on  v.    2. — Verse  49.  Then 
Daniel  requested  of  the  king,  and  he  set,  etc. 
■^i^l  properly,  "  and  (so)  he  set ;"  for  t  must  be 
joined  to  the  imperfect,  in  order  to  express  the 
sense  of  "that  "  (Winer,  §  44,  4).    X^S  therefore 
signifies  an  effectual  asking  in  this  passage,  a 
prevailing  with  the  king. — Over  the  affairs  of 
the  province   of  Babylon,     sri"';!',  "man- 
agement of  business,  administration  "  (of.   fil^S 
Tlj^n,  1   Chron.   xxvi.   30).     The  effect  of  this 
"  placing   over  the  administration  of  the  pro- 
vince of  Babylon,"  was,  evidently,  to  include  the 
three  friends  of  Daniel  among  the  "D^cbc  ^3 
"^-'I'Pi    chap.    iii.     2,    whatever    may    have 
been  their  official  title.     But  their  elevation  to 
the  rank  of  Shiltonim  to  the   king  involved  no 
receding  on  the  part  of  Daniel  from  the  political 
dignity  conferred  on  him,   according  to  v.    48 
(Porphyry.  Berth.,  Hitz.,  etc.).     It  rather  serves 
to  illustrate  the  powei-ful  influence  of  the  new 
roj'al  favorite  and  councillor.     But  Daniel  was 
only  this,  not  an  actual  chief  satrap  of  Babylon, 
to  whom  the  three  friends  might  have  been  sub- 
ordinate.    See  V.  48,  and  compare  chap.  iii.  12, 
which   clearly   indicates   that    Daniel    did    not 
belong    to    the     number    of     prominent    civU 
functionaries    of    the    province     of     Babylon. 
[On  the  contrary,  the  passage  here  referred  to 
only  shows  that  Daniel's  three  friends  were,  as 
here  stated,  the  persons  directly  responsible  for 
the  civil  functions  in   a   certain   district ;  evi- 
dently as  subordinates  under  some  single  higher 
officer,  who  in  this  case  could  be  no  other  than 
Daniel  himself — a  personage  too  high  for  direct 
impeachment  by  these  officious  underlings.] — ■ 
But  Daniel  sat  in  the  gate  of  the  king,   i.e., 
within  the   boimds  of  his  palace,  at  his  court. 
Compare  Tji^jn  15a  Est.  ii.  1,  9,  21  ;  iii.  2  et 
seq.  ;  also  ai  !ri'/.oi   (of  the  Medo-Persian  court), 
Cyrojmdia,  VIII.  1,  and  the  Turkish  "Porte," 
— and   generally,   Eosenmiiller,   Altes  11.    Neue.i 
Morgeidand,  III.  399  ff.     Incorrectly  Bertholdt 
and  Gesenius  (Jes<ims.  i.  G97),   "He  became  iu- 
tendant  of  the  royal  castle," — on  which  Hiiver- 
nick  remarks,  with  justice  :    "  It  is  hardly  con- 
ceivable how  such  nonsense  could  be  imputed  to 
our  book."     ["  The  chief  ruler  of  the  province 
had  a  number  of  v-ajixoi,    nnder-nfficen.  in  the 
province  for  the  various  branches  of  the  govern- 
ment.     To  such  offices  the  king  appointed  Dan- 
iel's three  friends  at   his  request,  so  that   he 


CHAP.  II.   1-49. 


81 


might  himself  be  able  as  chief  ruler  to  reside 
continually  at  the  court  of  the  king." — Eeil.] 

ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAJi  PRINCIPLES  RELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLO- 
GETICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETICAL  SUG- 
GESTIONS. 

We  are  compelled,  in  view  of  the  great  im- 
portance of  the  image  of  the  monarchies  for  a 
correct  estimate  of  the  Messianic  and  practical 
bearing  of  all  that  follows,  to  separate  our  dog- 
matical and  ethical  observations  on  this  vision 
into  several  sections.  Accordingly,  we  treat 
first  of  its  form  ;  next  of  the  ciirumstnitces  of  the 
times,  which  afforded  suitable  analogies  for  its 
prophetico-historical  composition ;  in  the  third 
place,  of  the  symholwn  of  the  image  as  a  whole  ; 
fourthly,  of  the  interpreUition  of  the  four  world- 
kingdoms,  and  especially  of  the  second,  third, 
and  fourth ;  and  finally,  of  the  relation  of  the 
prophetic  vision  to  the  history  of  the  founding 
and  development  of  the  Messianic  kingdom — the 
whole  to  be  followed  by  practical  homiletical 
remarks. 

1.  Tlie  fyrm  of  Nehuchaiinez!ar' »  vision  is 
distinguished  from  that  of  almost  all  the  other 
prophetic  visions  of  the  Old  Testament,  by  the 
peculiarity,  that  it  is  a  dream-vision,  under 
which  mysterious  form  its  highly  important  pro- 
phetic contents  are  revealed  first  to  a  powerful 
henthea  monarch.  The  dreams  of  certain 
heathen  princes  of  patriarchal  times,  e.g.,  of 
Abiraelech,  Laban,  and  Pharaoh  (Gen.  xx.  3 ; 
xxxi.  2-1;  xli.  1  et  seq. ),  present  the  only  anal- 
ogy to  this  fact,  so  far  as  they  were  divinely 
occasioned,  and  had  a  direct  reference  to  the 
fortunes  of  God's  people.  But  their  contents 
lack  the  rich,  lively  dramatic  and  symbolic  char- 
acter of  this  vision  ;  and  in  the  double  dream  of 
Pharaoh,  the  single  instance  where  this  approxi- 
mately exists  (Gen.  xli.),  we  miss  the  far-reach- 
ing vision  that  covers  all  history,  and  the  wealth 
of  Messianic  references,  by  which  the  dream- 
vision  under  consideration  is  so  remarkably  dis- 
tinguished. The  ob.servation  of  Hiivemick 
(Komm.,  p.  43  et  seq.)  respecting  the  dreams  of 
heathen  persons  in  the  Scripture  history,  al- 
though instructive  and  worthy  of  approval  in 
other  respects,  has  only  a  partial  application  in 
this  case  :  ' '  We  often  ( ?)  make  the  observation 
in  the  Scriptures,  that  whenever  it  became 
necessary  to  magnify  the  theocracy  and  the 
kingdom  of  God  on  earth — which  could  only  be 
aided  to  accomplish  its  final  destiny  by  means 
of  miracles, — and  %vhenever  the  welfare  of  the 
faithful  required  a  special  interference,  revela- 
tions were  imparted  to  heathen  and  unbelievers, 
and  generally  by  means  of  dreams.  Compare 
Gen,  XX.  3  (where  it  is  expressly  stated,  with 
reference  to  Abimelech,  '131  3-n;t<  8<;"''')i 
xxxi.  24;  xli.;  Judg.  vii.  13,  14.  At  the 
same  time,  the  Scriptures  assign  as  the  reason 
for  such  revelations  the  Kuhjtctire  aim,  '  to  with- 
draw man  from  his  purpose,  and  hide  pride  from 
man,'  Job  xxxiii.  17.  This  Divine  purpose  was 
directly  favored  by  the  solemn  awe  with  which 
the  heathen  world  regarded  dreams  (unipoi  Seim, 
}rti't-iu~Tnr),  US  is  proven  by  the  characteristic 
aud  probably  proverbial  expression  of  Homer : 
Kdl  yap  -'  bvap  in  Adi  cartv  l^ll.  I.  63) ;  of.  further, 
6 


II.  II.  26  et  seq. ;  Odys.  VI.  13  et  seq. ;  xxiv. 
11,  12;  Herod.  VII.  16;  also  Knapp,  Scripta 
varia  arg.,  p.  103  ss.  ;  Bosenmiiller,  ^4.  u.  iV. 
MargeiU.,  III.  33  et  seq. ;  Jahn,  I^inl.  i)is  A.  T., 
II.  391  et  seq." — An  instructive  article  in  the 
Evangel.  Missions-Magazin,  1863,  No.  1,  which 
was  written  by  Ostertag  and  entitled  Der 
Traum  und  seine  Wirknug  in  der  Heidenwelt, 
treats  of  the  important  part  which  dreams 
continuaUy  play  in  the  religious  life  of  heathen- 
dom, aud  more  especially,  when  it  is  aroused  and 
influenced  by  Christian  missionary  efforts.  Cf. 
also  Delitzsch,  Bibl.  Psycholog ie,  §  14,  p.  283  et 
seq. ,  and  SpUttgerber,  SMif  iind  Tod,  neist  den 
damit  ziisammenMngenden  Erscheinungen  des 
Seelenlebens  (Halle,  1806),  p.  144  et  seq.  The 
two  latter  distinguish  more  carefully  than 
Hiivemick,  in  the  above  passage,  the  dreams 
inspired  merely  by  conscience  and  those  of  a 
divinely  caused  and  presaging  ch.iracter,  which 
were  more  frequent  within  the  domain  of 
heathendom,  from  the  dreams  of  revelation  in 
the  proper  sense,  whose  occurrence  was  mucti 
less  common  among  gentile  nations,  being  gen- 
erally limited  in  the  Old  and  Xew  Testaments 
to  the  people  of  God.  Among  the  former  class 
they  reckon,  e.g.,  the  dreams  of  Pharaoh  ;  among 
the  latter,  the  dreams  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  in 
chap.  ii.  and  iv.  of  our  prophet. 

The  important  circumstance  must  be  observed, 
in  this  connection,  that  Nebuchadnezzar's 
dream-vision  relating  to  the  four  world-king- 
doms was  evidently  imparted  to  this  heathen 
monarch  while  in  a  state  of  violent  and  guilty 
terror,  but  in  so  confused  and  indefinite  a  form 
as  to  exceed  his  understanding,  and  as  even  to 
prevent  a  clear  reproduction  of  its  nature  by 
the  unaided  efforts  of  his  memory.  In  both  re- 
spects he  was  compelled  to  seek  the  aid  of  an 
Israelitish  prophet,  as  au  instrument  of  the  only 
true  God  to  make  known  the  purport  of  His 
revelation  (cf.  supra,  on  vs.  1  and  3).  This 
feature  is  certainly  remarkable,  but  by  no 
means  incomprehensible.  The  heathen  experi- 
enced but  a  single  impulse  in  the  ditection  of 
prophecy ;  the  clearly  connected  description  and 
analysis  of  the  image  of  the  future  which  he 
had  seen  were  reserved  for  the  spiritual  art  of 
the  theocratic  seer.  The  startling  impression 
which  had  been  made  on  the  mind  of  the  king 
while  dreaming,  by  the  appearance  of  the  bright 
colossus,  its  sudden  fall,  and  its  total  destruc 
tiou  and  annihilation  predominated  to  an  extens 
that  destroyed  his  recollection,  and  left  him,  ou 
awaking,  with  a  mere  sense  of  having  seen 
something  highly  important  and  of  great  signi- 
ficance for  his  own  future  and  for  that  of  his 
kingdom.  It  was  natural  that  this  should  at 
once  give  rise  to  the  wish  to  recall  the  vision 
clearly,  in  o:der  to  ascertain  more  fully  what  it 
might  portend ;  and  that  this  desire  should 
finally  excite  such  alarm  as  to  banish  sleep.  His 
condition  is  not  without  many  parallels  in  the 
history  of  man's  spiritual  life.  The  Egyptian 
ruler  had,  indeed,  retained  the  contents  of  his 
prophetic  dreams,  and  required  Joseph  for  the 
purpose  merely  of  interpreting  their  meaning ; — 
in  connection  with  which  the  much  less  start- 
ling character  of  the  dreams  must  be  regarded. 
But  in  more  recent  times  many  instances  have 
been  recorded,  in  which  significeint  dreams  were 
forgotten, — either  whoUy,  or  so  far  as  details 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


were  concerned, — while  they  left  a  powerful  im- 
pression in  the  mind  of  the  dreamer  (cf.  Reitz, 
Hiitorie  der  Wiedergeborenen,  I.,  p.  132  et  seq. ; 
Schubert,  SymboUkdes  Traums,  p.  211  [3ded.]  ; 
by  the  same,  Geschickte  der  Sede,  II.,  p.  94  et 
seq.  ;  Splittgerber,  as  above,  p.  118  et  seq.). 
And  the  ancient  Roman  poet  Attius  (Cicero,  de 
diciiiitat.,  II.  21)  has  at  least  described  the  alarm 
produced,  on  the  sudden  awaldng  of  the  subject, 
by  an  impressive  dream,  in  a  manner  which 
thoroughly  recalls  the  behavior  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar as  described  in  this  chapter : 

**  Rex  ipse  Pricnmuf  sonuiio  mentis  metu 

Percul^un,  curia  sumpttts  suspirantibu9 

Exuacrificaiiat  /losliis  balayttibus. 

Turn  cojijectorem  pofttutat^  pacem  petens^ 

Ut  se  edoceret^  obsecrans  Apollinem, 

Quo  sese  veritmt  tanUE  sortes  itomnium.^ 

In  view  of  all  this  there  is  nothing  in  the  ex- 
ternal form  and  dress  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  vision 
that  removes  it  materially  beyond  the  influence 
of  conditioning  circumstances,  such  as  are  else- 
where apparent  in  the  surroundings  of  projihetic 
dream-visions.  Consequently  the  credibility  of 
the  narrative  cannot  be  assailed  on  psychologi- 
cal grounds,  nor  on  any  other ;  and  the  attempt 
of  Von  Lengerke.  Bleek,  Hitzig,  and  others,  to 
Ktamp  it  as  an  imitation  of  the  history  of 
Pharaoh  and  Joseph,  designed  to  encourage  and 
strengthen  the  faith  of  the  Israelites  in  the  time 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  must  especially  be  re- 
jected, as  being  decidedly  arbitrary,  since  the 
peculiarities  in  the  conduct  and  character  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  by  far  exceed  the  traits  he 
manifests  in  common  with  his  precursor 
Pharaoh,  and  also  with  his  alleged  imitator 
Antiochus, 

2.  In  regard  to  the  points  of  connection  w/iicfi 
existed  in  tlie  state  of  the  uorld  for  the  prophetic 
image  of  Nebuchndnesznr' s  drenm,  see  Kranich- 
f  eld's  observation  on  v.  10 :  "It  is  not  recorded, 
as  being  unessential,  how  much  information,  in 
regard  to  his  spiritual  state  at  the  time  of  the 
dream,  the  king  imparted  to  the  wise  men,  nor 
yet  how  much  they  were  able  to  apprehend 
themselves  in  view  of  the  political  aspect  of  the 
times.  The  historical  point  of  departure  for  the 
knowledge  of  the  dream  as  a  revelation,  is  found 
in  a  consideration  that  must  pre-eminently  con- 
cern a  king  as  such,  at  the  beginning  of  a  newly- 
founded  realm,  and  in  the  presence  of  a  power- 
ful and  threatening  contiguous  state,  viz.  :  the 
•(uestion  respecting  the  fate  of  his  dynasty  and 
•if  his  kingdom."  Cf.  page  120 :  "  But  the  politi- 
cal constellation,  even  in  the  early  years  of 
Nebuchadnezzar's  reign,  was  not  of  a  nature  to 
•>revent  the  writer  from  recognizing  a  powerful 
rival  of  the  Chaldsean  empire  in  the  Median 
kingdom.  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  had  already 
pointed  to  the  nations  of  the  north,  or  specifi- 
cally to  Persia  (Elam)  and  Media  as  the  executors 
of  the  judgment  that  should  come  upon  Babylon, 
cf.  Isa.  xiii.  17 ;  21,  2  ;  Jer.  1.  3,  9.  41 ;  11.  11,  28.— 
Above  all.  Media  stood  as  a  powerful  rival  to  the 
Chaldsean  kingdom  upon  the  historical  arena,  at 
the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  entrance.  The 
Medes  were  allied  with  the  Babylonians  in  the 
destruction  of  Nineveh,  and  in  that  joint  under- 
taking of  an  earlier  period  were  already  able  to 
render  powerful  a.ssistance ;  there  are  even  in- 
dications that  on  that  occasion  the  Babylonians 
saw  the  direction  of  their  military  enterprises 
principally  in  the  hands  of  the  Medea.     They 


shared  with  the  Babylonians  in  the  poiseBsioD 
of  the  Assyrian  empire — the  latter  taking  the 
western  portion,  while  the  former  claimed  chiefly 
the  regions  east  and  north-ea.st  of  the  Tigris. 
How  greatly  Nebuchadnezzar  was  obliged  to 
dread  the  power  of  his  neighbor  is  shown  by  hii 
fortifications  in  the  north,  which  were  begun 
soon  after  his  accession  to  the  throne,  and  prose- 
cuted with  vigor  during  the  greater  part  of  his 
reign  (cf.  Xiebuhr,  GescJi.  Assurs  und  BabeU  ji. 
218  et  seq.,  p.  223);  an  Elamitic-Median  WiU 
against  Babylon  appears  to  have  transpired  a« 
early  as  the  11th  or  12th  year  of  his  reign." — If 
to  these  observations  on  the  relations  of  Babylon 
to  Medo-Persia,  we  add  the  remarks  of  the  same 
exegete  in  relation  to  Javan,  i.e..  Greece,  which 
was  looming  up  in  the  distant  political  horizon 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  remember,  that  his 
western  rival  and  probable  successor  to  the 
power  and  greatness  of  Medo-Persia  might  be 
well  known  to  a  Chaldfean  king  about  B.  C.  flOO 
— since  Sennacherib  had  already  been  engaged 
in  a  warm  contest  with  an  army  of  Greek  mer- 
cenaries in  Cilicia,  about  a  century  before ; 
since  further,  such  mercenaries  were  accus- 
tomed to  serve  in  the  Assyrian  armies  from  the 
time  of  Esar-haddon.  and  in  the  Egyptian  from 
the  time  of  Psammetichus,  and  since  the  Lydian 
kings  were  involved  in  exhaustive  and  bloody 
wars  with  the  loniaus,  Dorians,  and  iEolians  of 
Western  Asia  from  about  B.  C.  GIO  (see  Ilei'od., 
1.6;  II,  152,  163,  169;  Abydenus,  in  Euseb. 
Armen.  ed.  Anchor,  I. ,  p.  53  ;  Berosus,  Frarpn. 
hist.  Gracw,  II.,  504  ed.  Sliiller ; — cf.  supra, 
Introd.  §  7,  note  2), — it  will  be  evident  that  all 
the  conditions  were  present  which  could  possibly 
be  required  for  the  originating  cf  a  dream- 
vision,  by  which  a  Chaldsan  monarch  about  B. 
C.  600  was  forewarned  of  the  future  overthro%v 
of  his  dynasty  through  the  agency  of  warlike 
neighboring  states.  More  than  an  external  his- 
torical occasion  or  impulse  for  the  dream- vision, 
was  not  probably  derived  by  the  king  from  the 
peculiar  state  of  existing  political  affairs.  All 
that  bear-i  a  really  prophetic  character  in  his 
vision  is  to  be  traced  back  to  the  direct  agency 
of  God,  which  was  able  to  construct  a  majestic 
and  united  vision  of  the  deepest  prophetical  sig- 
nificance, out  of  the  extremely  sporadic  and  im- 
perfect natural  materials  that  were  provided  in 
the  range  of  the  king's  political  observation. 
Left  to  himself,  Nebuchadnezzar,  whether  awake 
or  dreaming,  could  merely  have  originated  cer- 
tain presentiments,  or  combinations  of  political 
wisdom,  which  at  the  best,  must  remain  mere 
images  of  the  fancy,  or  acute  speculations.  If 
his  dream  became  a  picture  of  the  future  that 
embraced  the  world  and  displayed  the  pro- 
foundest  prophetic  truths,  a  vision  that  was 
"certain,  and  the  interpretation  thereof  sure" 
(see  above,  v.  45),  this  was  entirely  owing  to  the 
all-enlightening  and  revealing  influence  of  the 
Divine  Logos  (John  i.  9),  who  sought  to  glorify 
Himself  and  His  prophet  at  the  court  of  the 
powerful  heathen  king,  in  order  thereby  to 
I  kindle  a  shining  light  of  Messianic  consolation 
!  for  His  faithful  ones  of  that  age,  as  well  as  for 
those  of  the  still  darker  periods  of  the  future. 
Cf.  infra,  Ethico-fundamental  principles,  et',-., 
on  chap.  viii. ,  No.  3. 

3.   7'he  symbolism  of  the   image  of  the  mon- 
archies in  general,  namely,  the  succession  of  the 


CHAP.  11.  1^9. 


four  metals,  gold,  silver,  brass,  and  iron,  as 
also  the  distribution  of  these  metals  over  the 
several  parts  of  a  colossal  idol  or  statue  in  the 
human  fonn,  the  contrast  between  the  brittle - 
ness  and  weakness  of  this  image  and  the  world- 
filling  greatness  and  solidity  of  the  stone  which 
takes  its  place,  etc.  ;  all  these,  like  the  funda- 
mental conditions  of  the  vision  itself,  may  find 
their  point  of  departure,  or  so  to  speak,  their 
root,  in  certain  relations  and  estimates  of  the 
time  that  naturally  prevailed  in  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's kingdom,  while  the  peculiarity  of 
their  arrangement  is  doubtless,  as  before,  to 
be  traced  back  to  the  revealing  influence  of 
God.  An  underlying  natural  basis  cannot  be 
mistaken. 

a.  In  the  symbolizing  of  a  succession  of  four 
world-kingdoms  by  a  connection  of  four  metals 
of  steadily  decreasing  value.  "A  comparative 
view  of  the  idea  of  a  separation  of  the  course  of 
temporal  development  into  four  world-periods, 
which  occurs  elsewhere  also,  is  instructive  in 
this  connection.  We  meet  it  in  the  Indian 
transformations  within  the  limits  of  the  four 
Yuys,  in  the  Graeco-Roman  conception  of  four 
metallic  aons  (the  ages  of  gold,  silver,  etc.  i,  and 
al.so  in  the  Parsee  idea  of  four  trees  that  have 
sprung  from  a  single  root,  composed  respect- 
ively of  gold,  silver,  steel,  and  iron.*  Hesiod 
indeed,  destroys  the  number  four,  by  introduc- 
ing a  fifth  kingdom  between  the  kingdoms  of 
brass  and  of  iron,  which  is  not  of  metal,  and  thus 
corresponds,  in  a  measure,  to  the  Messianic 
kingdom  of  Daniel,  namely,  the  (hKuiortpor  koI 
u/jf»jr,  iif  iin'  J  t  I'of  of  the  heroes  ;  but  irrespective 
of  this  feature,  the  constant  and  decided  com- 
bination of  the  idea  of  world-periods  with  the 
precise  number /o«r,  remains  a  noteworthy  fact. 
And  although  the  correspondence  that  has  been 
indicated,  for  instance,  in  the  case  of  Ovid  as 
coming  under  the  influence  of  Greek  concep- 
tions, must  in  all  probability  be  regarded  as 
based  on  that  idea,  and  moreover,  although  the 
Persian  idea  of  the  four  metallic  trees,  which 
has  been  referred  to,  may  not  have  been  unin- 
fluenced by  the  representations  of  Daniel, — it 
will  still  be  apparent,  that  the  natural  applica- 
tion of  the  number  four  to  the  ages  of  the  world 
rests  upon  a  profounder  reason  that  inheres  in 
the  nature  of  things,  and  evidently,  upon  a 
natural  and  simple  association  with  t/te  four 
itagts  of  human  life.     This  connection  of   the 


*  Cf.  WoUheiin  da  FonBeca,  Mi/tkologie  des  Alten  [tidlen, 
p.  2ti  et  seq.  ;  Hesioii.  'Epya  ko.\  ijtiepat.  106  ss.  ;  Ovid, 
Mttain.  I.,  yy  ss.  :  and  in  relation  to  the  old-Persic  doctrine 
of  four  nges  of  the  world,  especially  Qenesis  arid  AvftvUt  in 
Aunlnnd,  18H8,  Noft.  12  and  28.  and  also  DelitzHch.  Art. 
Danitl,  in  Hersog'a  Reat-Eitcyklofi  ,  p.  276.  According  to 
the  two  latttT.  the  book  Baltnuui  Je^ht,  for  instance,  con- 
tains the  following  remarkable  statement  of  the  myth  re- 
spectinK  the  fo-ar  a^jes  of  the  world:  "...  Zerdusht  de- 
manded immortality  fi-om  Oi-muzd.  then  Ormuzd  showed  to 
Zerdusht  the  all-embracing  wisdom :  whereupon  he  saw  a 
tree  having  such  a  root  that  four  trees  had  sprung  from  it, 
one  of  gold,  another  of  silver,  another  of  steel,  and  the 
fourth  of  iron.  .  .  .  Ormuzd  said  to  the  holy  Zerdusht :  i 
*  The  root  of  this  single  tree,  which  thou  hast  seen  (is  the  , 
world),  and  these  four  trees  are  the  four  times  which  shall  i 
come  :  thia  golden  one,  when  I  and  thou  entertain  each 
other,  and  Csta.sp-Shah  accepts  the  law.  and  the  body  of 
the  Deos  is  broken  and  they  conceal  themselves :  this  silver 
one  is  the  reign  of  the  royal  Artashir :  the  steel  one  is  the 
rule  of  Anosheveran  Chosru,  the  .son  of  Kobat;  that  of 
iron  the  evil  reign  of  the  Deos'"'  (on  which,  according  to 
the  Parsee  teaching,  the  time  of  the  Saviour  Sotiosh  is  finally 
to  follow). 


number  four  with  the  periods  of  human  lite  is 
especially  easy  in  Daniel,  since  the  four  phases 
of  development  are  illustrated  by  the  image  of 
man,  as  a  personification  of  heathendom" 
(Kranichfeld,  p.  118  et  seq.).  To  what  extent 
the  application,  in  this  case,  of  the  idea  ol 
four  ages  of  the  world  to  the  succession  of 
Asiatic  monarchies,  is  to  be  placed  to  the  ac- 
count of  the  natural  or  politicaJ  meditations  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  how  far  it  is  of  superna- 
tural suggestion  or  positively  revetiled,  cannot, 
of  course,  be  definitely  decided,  espeeially  in 
view  of  our  extremely  fragmentary  knowledge 
respecting  the  scope  of  religious  thought  and 
the  philosophy  of  human  life  among  the  Baby- 
lonians. 

b.  The  comparison  of  the  suoces-sive  kingdoms 
with  the  several  parts  of  a  colossal  human  or  idol 
image  is  also  probably  based  on  some  heathen 
mode  of  conceiving  nni  representing  things,  with 
which  the  dream-originating  Divine  principle  of 
revelation  may  have  connected  itself.  Daniel 
himself,  indeed,  indicates  nothing  whatever, 
either  in  his  recapitulation  of  the  dream  or  in 
the  interpretation,  that  can  show  that  the  form, 
size,  and  natural  dignity  of  the  several  paxt« 
(head,  breast,  belly,  legs),  contained  any  special 
symbolical  reference  to  the  character  of  the 
four  world-kingdoms  ;  and  any  attempt  to  con- 
struct such  relations  between  the  image  and  the 
objects  symbolized  is  exposed  to  the  danger  of 
being  involved  in  useless  inteqnetations  and 
idle  pastimes,  as  may  be  seen  in  many  older  ex- 
positors, and  even  as  late  as  in  Starke  (on  vs.  ^9 
and  41).  But  at  any  rate  the  size  and  position 
of  the  various  parts  merit  consideration  as  a 
tertium  cmnpar.,  so  far  as  the  first  kingdom, 
which  is  represented  by  the  head,  as  the  highest 
and  most  important,  but  also  the  smallest  organ, 
may  be  conceived  of  as  intensively  more,  but 
extensively  less  considerable,  than  the  succeed- 
ing ones  ;  as  also  each  successive  organ  may 
signify  an  aggregation  of  peoples  or  states  icf. 
supra,  on  v.  39),  which  becomes  steadily  more 
worthless  and  degraded,  from  an  internal  (ethi- 
cal) point  of  view,  but  as  regularly  increases  in 
size  and  extent.  In  one  re.'pect,  therefore, 
namely,  so  far  as  the  decrease  of  internal  moral 
worth  (or  dignity,  according  to  the  theocratic 
standard)  among  the  four  successive  kingdoms 
is  concerned,  the  symbolism  of  the  various 
bodily  parts  yields  the  same  result  as  that  of  the 
metals ;  whUe  in  another  respect  it  leads  to  a 
contrary  result,  inasmuch  as  it  repre.sents  these 
kingdoms  as  constantly  extending  their  lioun- 
daries. 

c.  The  final  consideration,  —  whether  the 
mysterious  stone,  that  descends  from  the  moun- 
tain and  shatters  the  metallic  image,  represent- 
ing Messiah's  kingdom  or  the  fifth  world-mon- 
archy, also  contains  features  that  may  be  traced 
back  to  the  religio-political  ideas  of  the  ancient 
Babylonians,  or  whether,  on  the  other  hand, 
this  closing  incident  of  the  whole  vision  must  be 
regarded  as  purely  supernatural  in  its  character, 
— can  hardly  lead  to.  a  definite  conclusion. 
Some  approach  to  Messianic  ideas  and  expecta- 
tions, however,  may  have  been  contained  in  tht 
religious  estimate  of  the  world  current  among 
that  people,  as  well  as  in  that  of  the  Per.sians,  the 
Greeks  (compare  what  was  remarked  above  con- 
cerning Hesiod  and  the  Zoroastrian  myth  of  the 


P4 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


four  trees),  the  ancient  Germans  and  Scandi- 
navians, etc.  The  stone  that  crushes  the  image 
of  the  monarchies  or  world-periods  may,  there- 
fore, have  been  a  conception  talien  from  the 
Chaldajan  or  Babylonian  circle  of  ideas,  similar 
in  its  nature  and  tendency  to  those  remarkable 
mythological  approximations  to  the  fundamental 
dogma  of  Christianity,  which  have  justly  been 
characterized  as  "  mythological  foreshadowings 
of  the  great  truth  :  '  The  word  was  made  flesh '  " 
(Kahnis,  Lutkerische  Do(jmatik,\\\.  334;  cf.  v. 
Osterzee,  Das  liild  Chriati  nuch  der  Hchrift,  p. 
C9  et  seq.  ;  J.  P.  Lange,  Dai  Apostolische 
Zeitalter,  I.,  p.  237  et  seq.). 

4.  T/ie  hittvrical  interpretation  of  the  four 
kingdoms,  or  the  application  of  the  image  of  the 
monarchies  to  the  facts  of  history  in  detail,  in- 
volves no  really  serious  difficulty  upon  the  sym- 
bolic principles  that  have  been  established,  in 
view  of  the  definite  statement  by  the  prophet  in 
verses  37,  38,  by  which  the  golden  head  desig- 
nates the  Chaldcean  empire  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
The  three  succeeding  kingdoms  may  therefore  be 
discovered,  without  leaving  room  for  doubt.  They 
necessarily  represent  the  three  phases  of  devel- 
opment in  the  great  Oriental  universal  monarchy, 
which  followed  next  after  the  ChaldiEan  period  ; 
for  the  prophetic  horizon,  whether  of  the  king 
or  Daniel,  did  not  embrace  the  Occident.  The 
four  workl-kingdoms  are  developed  without 
exception  on  one  and  the  same  geographical 
stage,  on  the  soil  of  the  Orhin  wientulis^  thus 
harmonizing  with  the  Biblical  representation 
under  the  symbol  of  a  siityle  colossal  human  im- 
age ;  and  the  only  world-kingdoms  of  the 
Orient  that  arose  after  the  overthrow  of  Babylon, 
and  that  equalled  it  in  importance,  were  the 
Medo-Persian  founded  by  Cyrus,  and  the  Mace- 
douiau-Hellenistic.  originated  by  Alexander  the 
.Great,  the  latter  of  which  passed  through  two 
stages,  viz.:  the  period  of  its  undivided  existence, 
and  that  of  its  constantly  increasing  division  and 
disintegration  under  the  post-Alexandrian  Dia- 
dochi.  These  two,  or,  by  a  more  correct  enumer- 
ation three,  final  forms  of  the  Oriental  universal 
monarchy,  are  represented  with  the  utmost 
clearness  by  the  silver  breast,  the  brazen  (copper) 
belly,  and  the  nether  extremities  which  are  at 
f  rst  of  iron  and  then  of  intermingled  iron  and 
clay.  The  breast  of  silver  designates  the  Medo- 
Persiau  kingdom,  which  first  succeeded  the 
golden  head,  or  Babylon.  It  does  not  signify 
Media  simply,  for  (1)  at  the  time  when  the 
Median  king  Cyaxares  (=  Darius  the  Mede,  see 
Introd.  g  8,  note  4)  and  his  nephew  and  son-in- 
law  Cyrus  overthrew  Babylon,  the  Persian  tribe 
had  already  Vjecome  so  prominent  within  the 
Median  realm  as  to  warrant  the  designation  of 
the  whole  kingdom  by  the  names  of  both  tribes, 
the  Median,  which  was  formerly  predominant, 
and  the  Persian  which  had  now  become  its 
equ.ol.  (2)  Daniel  accordingly  refers  to  the  whole 
\i'orld-kingdora  which  succeeded  Babylon  as  a 
kingdom  of  "  the  Modes  and  Persians"  (chap. 
V.  28 ;  ef  the  exposition  of  that  passage),  and 
even  in  the  section  relating  to  the  reign  of 
Darius  the  Mede  (chap,  vi  9.  13,  IG)  he  desig- 
nates the  religious  code,  which  was  in  force 
throughout  the  kingdom,  as  "the  law  of  the 
Medes  and  Persians."  thus  characterizing  it  as 
a  sacred  ordinance  that  rested  on  the  common 
Consent    of    both    the    nationalities    that    had 


united  under  a  single  government.  *  (3)  In  exact 
correspondence  with  this  is  his  representation 
of  the  Medo-Persian  kingdom,  in  chap.  viii. 
under  the  figure  of  a  wai'like  ram,  and  his  desig- 
nation of  a  succession  of  two  dynasties — a 
Median  and  a  Persian — simply  by  the  growth  of 
two  horns  from  the  head  of  the  ram,  of  which 
the  smaller  comes  up  first  (verse  3  ;  cf.  verse  20). 
(4)  Consequently,  the  instances  in  which  he 
distinguishes  Darius,  or  Cyrus,  or  succeeding 
kings,  by  the  titles,  respectively,  of  "king  of 
the  Medes,"  or  "king  of  the  Persians,"  must 
be  regarded  as  referring,  not  to  a  diversity  of 
realms,  but  simply  to  a  difference  of  tribal  re- 
lations among  these  rulers.  (5)  Further,  the 
vision  of  the  four  successive  beasts,  which  ia 
described  in  chap.  vii.  and  which  is  doubtless 
parallel  to  that  of  the  four  elements  in  the  im- 
age of  the  monarchies,  does  not  accord  with  the 
a.ssumption,  on  which  the  second  beast,  a  carni- 
verous  bear,  represents  the  kingdom  of  the 
Medes,  while  the  third,  a  leopard  with  four 
wings,  designates  the  Persian  monarchy,  which 
fact  was  scarcely  distinct  from  the  former  (see 
infra  on  that  passage).  (G)  Nor  does  Zech.  vi. , 
which  is  an  alleged  parallel  to  the  vision  before 
us,  warrant  a  conclusion  in  favor  of  the  opinion 
that  distinguishes  between  the  Median  and  Per- 
sian kingdoms ;  for  the  red,  black,  white,  and 
grizzled,  and  bay  horses,  mentioned  in  that  place, 
do  not  designate  various  lands  or  kingdoms  any 
more  than  do  the  horses  with  simOarly  varied 
colors,  which  are  introduced  by  the  same  pro- 
phet in  chap.  i.  7  et  seq.  (see  Kohler,  Die  Nach- 
exilischen  Prophetea  ii.  ],  09  etseq, ,  189  etseq.). 
(7)  Finally,  no  conclusion  in  favor  of  the 
Median  hypothesis  can  be  deduced  from  the 
remark  by  Daniel  in  verse  39  a,  that  the  sec- 
ond kingdom  should  be  inferior  to  that  of 
Nebuchadnezzar ;  for  an  ethical  inferiority  of 
the  Persian  kingdom  to  that  of  the  Clialdae- 
ans  might  be  readily  asserted  from  a  theocratic 
point  of  view,  inasmuch  as  it  clearly  displayed 
a  greater  moral  and  social  depravation  under  its 
later  kings,  than  the  former.  Only  Cyrus  ex- 
celled the  Chaldaean  rulers  in  friendly  and  bene- 
volent conduct  toward  the  theocracy,  while  hia 
immediate  successors,  Cambyses  and  Pseudo- 
Smerdis,  treated  the  people  of  God  with  greater 
severity  than  had  any  Chaldsean  king  whatever 
(cf.  also  the  sufferings  inflicted  on  the  Jews  by 
Xer.\es,  according  to  the  book  of  Esther,  and 
also  by  Artaxerxes  I.,  according  to  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah). 

But  if,  in  view  of  these  considerations,  the 


•  The  force  of  the  expression  "the  law  of  the  Metlcs  and 
Persians"  (0"lD^   '^T?3  n))   in  chap.  vi.  as  an  evidence 

of  the  union  of  the  two  neighlioring  Iranian  nations  in  a 
single  state  as  early  as  the  ])eriod  of  the  Chalda-an  su- 
premacy, and  perhaps  earlier  still,  haa  been  recognized, 
e,  g.,  by  Kranichfeld,  despite  his  preference  for  the  inter- 
pretation which  refers  the  second  world-kinfrdom  to  Media, 
and  the  third  to  Persia.  In  a  note  on  page  19'^  et  setj.  hi 
contests  the  assertion  of  Von  Lengerke.that  this  formula  real- 
ly originated  aft«r  the  time  of  Cyrus,  and  is  therefore  i 
gross  anachronism  in  the  mouth  of  Daniel,  by  arguing 
that  the  union  of  the  two  peoples  in  a  single  n:ition.  or 
at  least  under  a  singje  government,  dates  considerublj 
beyond  the  time  of  Cyrus,  and  accoidingly.  that  an  e.x- 
clnsively  Median  realm  was  never  in  e.vistcnco.  The  con- 
formity of  this  view  to  the  actual  historical  development 
of  the  ancient  Iran  is  shown  by  Nicbuhr,  Ge^rh.  AtnuiJi 
una  Babelt,  p.  1S6 ;  cf.  Spiegel  In  Autiana.  186B,  p.  3St 
ct  seq. 


CHAP.  II.  1-49. 


second  kingdom  of  the  image  of  the  monarchies 
represents  Medo-Persia,  there  can  be  no  further 
douht  as  to  the  interpretation  of  the  third, 
which  is  symbolized  by  the  brazen  belly.  It 
must  necessarily  designate  the  Macedonian 
icoiid-kingdom  of  Alexander  the  Oreat,  whose 
grand  and  rapid  introduction,  as  if  borne  on  the 
wings  of  the  tempest,  is  represented  in  the 
parallel  vision  of  chap.  vii.  by  the  figure  of  a 
leopard  with  four  wings,  but  which  receives 
consideration  in  this  case  (chap.  ii. ),  only  so  far 
as  its  ethical  and  religious  inferiority  in  relation 
to  its  predecessors  is  concerned,  and  as  the  re- 
mark that  it  should  "bear  rule  over  all  the 
earth "  (verse  39  b)  characterizes  its  external 
greatness.  The  kingdoms  of  the  Hellenistic 
Uiadochi.  which  arose  from  the  universal  mon- 
archy of  Alexander  the  Great,  cannot  be  included 
in  the  third  or  brazen  kingdom,  since  they  pre- 
sent a  picture  of  internal  disruption,  such  as  is 
clearlj'  symbolized  by  the  fourth  monarchy  of 
Daniel.  The  nether  extremities  of  the  colossus 
only,  which  were  at  first  (in  the  legs)  of  iron, 
but  afterward  (in  the  feet  and  toes)  a  mixture 
of  iron  and  clay,  can  be  made  to  harmonize  with 
the  period  of  the  Diadochi.  In  their  interpreta- 
tion, the  legs,  which  are  yet  of  iron,  will  prob- 
ably refer  to  the  time  during  which  the  im- 
mediate succes.sors  of  Alexander  endeavored  at 
least  to  maintain  the  unity  of  the  realm,  despite 
their  incessant  quarrels  and  bloody  conflicts, — 
hence  down  to  the  battle  near  Ipsus  (B.  C.  323- 
301);  while  the  feet,  which  are  in  part  of  iron, 
and  in  part  of  clay,  represent  the  succeeding 
state  of  growing  dismemberment  and  hostile  di- 
visions (in  which  the  kingdom  of  the  Seleucidfe 
in  Syria,  and  that  of  the  LagidiE  in  Egypt,  were 
alone  able  to  maintain,  during  a  considerable 
period,  a  position  of  commanding  power) ;  cf. 
above,  on  vs.  41-43.  That  this  torn  and  cor- 
rupted state  of  the  post-Alexandrian  Hellenistic 
empire,  so  analogous  to  a  putrefying  gigantic 
carcass,  and  also  that  the  vain  attempts  to  heal 
the  sores  by  means  of  intermarriages  among  the 
contending  princely  families,  etc. ,  should  be  al- 
ready described  and  prefigured  in  the  visions  of 
a  Chaktean  king  about  B.  C.  600,  can,  of  course, 
find  an  explanation  only  in  the  direct  operations 
of  the  Divine  Logos,  by  which  the  future  is  re- 
vealed (cf.  No.  d).  To  base  these  features  on  a 
reference  to  the  historical  condition  of  Hellen- 
ism during  the  Chaldaean  period,  to  its  internal 
divisions  and  incurable  discords,  which  were,  at 
that  early  day,  as  apparent  as  was  their  warlike 
bravery,  and  further,  to  the  custom  of  political 
marriages  among  princes,  which  was  already 
frequently  observed  (Kranichfeld),  seems  inade- 
quate, and  involves  the  danger  of  an  exagger- 
ated naturalizing  of  the  prophetic  process  in 
question.  Nor  can  the  custom  of  political  mar- 
riages be  shown  to  have  existed  in  the  time  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  among  the  Greeks  (with  whom 
we  have  chiefly  to  do,  in  this  connection),  al- 
though it  prevailed  in  Medo-Persia  and  Egypt. 
Finally,  the  fourth  kingdom  was,  at  an  early 
period,  made  to  signify  the  Roman  universal 
dominion,  so  that  its  first  stadium  of  unimpaired 
strength  (the  legs  of  iron)  represented  the  period 
of  the  republic  and  the  first  emperors,  and  the 
second,  divided  and  powerless  stage  (the  feet  of 
iron  and  clay)  referred  to  the  later  empire,  or 
even  to  the  middle  ages  and  more  recent  times 


(in  which,  according  to  Anberlen's  exposition  of 
V.  43,  the  German  and  Sclavic  nationalities 
were  intermingled  with  the  Roman) ;  but  this 
interpretation  is  opposed  by  many  considera- 
tions. (1)  It  ascribes  a  range  of  vision  over  the 
future  to  the  dreaming  king  and  the  prophetic 
interpreter,  which  lacks  every  support  based 
on  the  actual  condition  of  the  times,  since,  as  is 
well  known,  the  greatness  and  world-historical 
importance  of  Rome  were  unknown  until  four 
hundred  years  after  the  captivity.  Unlike  the 
sections  of  the  prophecy  which  relate  to  Persia 
and  Javan,  this  would  have  no  foundation  it 
existing  relations,  but  rather,  would  be  of  an 
abstractly  supematnral  character.  (3)  The 
S"ri3  mentioned  in  Chap.  xi.  30,  although  al- 
ready identified  with  the  Romans  by  the  Sep- 
tuagint  and  the  Vulgate,  must  rather  bo  re- 
garded as  a  race  of  Oreek  islanders,  in  view  of 
the  constant  usage  of  the  word  elsewhere  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  more  especially,  because 
there  is  no  indication  of  the  identity  of  these 
Chittim  with  the  fourth  world-kingdom,  either 
in  chap,  xi.,  or  elsewhere.  They  are  simply 
noticed  in  that  connection,  like  the  northern 
and  southern  kmgdoms,  as  a  constituent  part  of 
the  Javanic  or  Hellenistic  empire.  (3)  Thesym- 
bohc  details  comprehended  in  the  fourth  or 
lowest  world-kingdom  according  to  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's vision — the  legs  of  iron,  the  feet  and 
toes  part  of  iron  and  part  of  clay,  etc. ,  appear 
natural  and  suitable  when  applied  to  the 
development  of  Hellenism  after  Alexander,  and 
particularly  in  the  era  of  the  Seleucidie  and  the 
Ptolemies,  while  they  lead  to  re.sults  of  a  more 
or  less  arbitrary  character,  with  every  attempt 
to  demonstrate  the  Roman  hyi)othesis  ;  e.g.,  the 
view  of  Buddeus,  Hengstenberg,  and  others,  by 
which  the  two  legs  of  iron  designate  the  eastern 
and  western  empires  after  Honorius  and  Ar- 
cadius,  and  that  of  Cocceius,  which  regards  the 
iron  and  the  clay  as  indicating  the  separation  of 
the  Roman  power  into  a  spiritual  and  a  material 
kingdom  (papacy  and  empire),  etc.  (4)  That 
the  collocation  of  the  world-monarchy  of  Alex- 
ander and  the  kingdoms  of  the  Diadochi  aa 
forming  one  and  the  same  ^--'r<  ^  position  that 
becomes  necessary  on  this  view,  although  sup- 
ported by  chap.  viii.  21  (where  a  grouping  into  a 
T;")  n~v?a  has  actually  come  to  passi,  is  yet 
shown  by  chap.  xi.  4,  to  be  decidedly  opposed 
to  the  real  meaning  of  the  prophet  (cf .  1  Mace. 
(i.  1  and  7  et  seq.).  (5)  Finally,  the  figure  of  a 
stone,  that  destroys  the  image,  is  positively  false 
as  a  representation  of  the  triumph  of  Christian- 
ity over  the  world-power,  if  the  Roman  power 
be  regarded  as  the  fourth  and  final  phase  of  the 
development  of  the  latter;  for  this  was  not 
overthrown  and  destroyed  suddenly  and  at  a 
blow  by  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  like  the  statue 
by  the  stone,  but  instead,  it  incorporated  Chris- 
tianity with  itself,  and  continued,  as  Christian- 
ized Rome,  to  bear  rule  over  the  earth  during 
more  than  a  thousand  years.  It  might,  there- 
fore, be  more  properly  identified  vrith  the  stone, 
than  described  as  a  potency  inimical  to  it;  but 
it  can,  in  any  case,  find  no  place  in  the  series  of 
preMessianic  world-kingdoms  that  were  hostile 
to  His  reign.  [To  these  arguments  we  add  the 
marked  coincidences  bstween  the  several  visiom 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


of  Daniel  respecting  these  four  great  world- 
powers,  as  exliibited  in  the  harmonic  table  in- 
serted in  the  introduction  ;  and  we  call  especial 
attention  to  the  almost  perfect  parallel  between 
tlie  two  '■  little  horns  "  in  each  case.  Now  as  one 
of  these  is  admitted  on  all  hands  to  refer  to  Auti- 
ochus  Ejjiphanes,  the  other,  if  identical,  is,  of 
course,  a  constituent  likewise  of  the  Syrian 
empire  of  the  Seleucida;,  as  the  fourth  Oriental 
monarchy.  The  discrepancies  alleged  by  Keil, 
p.  -08  et  seq. ,  as  arguing  a  different  interpreta- 
tion of  the  little  horns  respectively,  wUl  be  duly 
noticed  in  the  exposition  of  the  passages  them- 
selves. J 

For  these  reasons  we  adopt  that  exposition  of 
the  four  kingdoms  which  .Bertholdt  {Diinid,  I. 
192  et  seq. )  has  recently  advocated  with  penetra- 
tion and  fairness,  after  Polychronius,  Grotius, 
Tossauus,  Zeltner,  and  others,  had  asserted  its 
principal  features.  We  differ  from  Bertholdt, 
however,  in  failing  to  deduce  anything  that 
argues  the  composition  of  Daniel's  prophecy  in 
the  period  of  the  Seleucidce  and  Asmonaeans,  from 
the  reference  of  the  feet  of  iron  and  of  clay  to 
the  times  of  the  later  Diadochi,  since,  as  will 
be  shown  more  in  detail  hereafter,  we  regard 
the  reference  of  passages  like  chap.  vii.  8  et 
seq.  ;  ix.  24  et  seq.  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes  as 
not  conflicting  with  the  authenticity  of  the 
book.  We  accordingly  reject  the  following  in- 
terpretations, which  differ  from  ours  in  various 
particulars : 

{ft. }  That  of  Bunsen  (cf.  Introd.  §  4,  note  1), 
which  applies  the  golden  head  to  Assyria,  in  har- 
mony with  the  alleged  original  interpretation  by 
Daniel,  the  breast  of  silver  to  Babylon,  the 
brazen  belly  to  Media,  and  the  iron  legs  to 
Persia,  but  which  is  thus  guilty,  not  only  of  a 
direct  coutradiction  of  v.  38  ( "  thou  art  this  head 
of  gold  "),  but  also  of  a  misconception  that  con- 
flicts with  history,  in  relation  to  the  intimate 
connection,  and  even  essential  identity  of  the 
kingdoms  of  As.syria  and  Babylon,  which  could 
never  have  been  contrasted  as  gold  and  silver, 
or  the  lion  and  the  bear  (cf.  chap.  vu.  5 
et  seq.)* 

(*. )  That  of  Hitzig  and  Redepenning  (see 
above,  on  v.  yO  n).  which  refers  the  head  and 
breast  to  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Belshazzar,  as  the 
only  Babj-louian  kings  whom  the  author  is  said 
to  have  known  and  which  is  therefore,  at  least, 
a  partial  reproduction  of  the  scheme  formerly 
attempted  by  the  Swede,  H.  Benzel  {Diiarrt.  de 
quKtuor  orliis  monarchiis,  1740),  and  by  Haren- 
berg,  Dathe,  and  Hezel,  to  personify  the  four 


*  Cf.  Ziindel.  Krit.  UnterxK.,  p.  82;  and  generally  as  re- 
spects the  continuity  of  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  em- 
pires and  their  inseparable  connection  in  point  of  nationality, 
lelii^ion,  and  civilization,  see  the  valuable  sketch  of  the 
i-esult.s  achieveii  by  the  latest  efforts  of  Assyriologi.sts ; 
yintve  tl  BabylvJit.  in  the  I^evite  det  deiix  Momien^  ISfiS, 
March  15,  by  Alfred  Maury.  The  old-Babylonian  fChal- 
diean).  the  Assyrian,  and  the  later  Babylonian  empires, 
are  iu  fact  but  three  successive  phases  of  the  development 
of  one  and  the  same  world-kinpdom,  despite  their  changes 
of  dynasties  and  capitals,  iis  also  the  Median,  the  Persian 
(.\chaemenidian),  the  I'arthian,  and  other  kingdoms,  are 
successive  phases  in  the  manifestation  of  a  single  national 
empire  on  Iranian  soil.     Cf.  U.  Kawlinson.  The  Five  Gyeut 

M'iHuri:li.leii  of  thK  E(t>,lern  M'orld,  in-  tlie  Hii-tonj 

of  CliahU'i,  Atini/ri'i,  Batif/lnit,  Mtdiit,  and  I'erxia,  London, 
IbtjT,  4  vols.  Also  A.  Scheuchzer"s  Asti/ri'^che  Fi  ruclmii- 
oen  in  M.  Heidenheim'a  Deittuc/ie  Vlevtdr^tritchrtft  fiir 
e'iul.-lhtul.  Fursclwna,  Vol.  IV..  No.  •)  (Jtetj),  p.  4  etaeq. 


kingdoms  (regard' ng  them  as  metonymies  foi 
four  Babylonian  kings). 

(c.)  The  view  of  Ephraem  Syrus,  Venema, 
Eichhom,  V.  Lengerke,  Bleek,  de  Wette,  Kirmss, 
Hilgenf  eld,  Delitzsch,  Kranichf  eld  ( and  condition- 
ally, i.e.,  so  far  as  it  conforms  to  the  views  undet 
a  and  b,  also  of  Ewald,  Bunsen,  and  Hitzig), 
that  the  head  represents  Babylon,  the  breast 
Media,  the  belly  Persia,  and  the  legs  Greece  and 
the  Diadochian  kingdoms  (see  for  the  contrary, 
above.  No.  4). 

{d.)  The  " orthodox "  view,  which  refers  the 
first  three  kingdoms  to  Babylon,  Medo-Persia, 
and  Greece,  but  the  fourth  to  Rome  and  the 
states  which  have  sprung  from  it  since  the 
empire  ;  early  represented  by  Josephus  {Ant.  x. 
10,  4),  by  a  majority  of  church-fathers — e.special- 
ly  by  Jerome,  Orosius,  and  Theodoret;  also  by 
all  the  expositors  of  the  Middle-age  church  after 
Walafrid  Strabo,  and  by  a  majority  of  modems, 
of  whom  we  mention  Buddeus  (Hist,  eccles.  p. 
ii.  sect.  5,  p.  (519  ss.),  Joach.  Lange,  Starke, 
Zeis,  Velthusen  (Ammadpersiones  ad  Dan.  11. 
27-45  ;  Prag,  1783),  Menken  (Das  Monarchien- 
hUd,  Brem,  and  Aurich,  1809),  Hengstenberg, 
Hiivemick,  Caspari  (Die  vier  daitiel.  Weltmonar- 
chieii,  iu  the  Zeitschrift  fiir  lut/i.  Theologie  und 
Kirche,  1841,  No.  4),  Hofmann  ( Weissaguiig 
und  Erf iiUung,  1.276  et  seq.),  Keil  (Einl.  ins 
A.  T.  §  134,  p.  443,  [also  in  his  Cuninientary  on 
Daniel]),  Gausaen  {Daniel  le  Pri/p/iete,  2d.  edit. 
18 JQ,  I.  250  ss.),  Auberlen  {Daniel,  etc.,  p.  42  et 
seq.),  Ziindel  (Kiit  Unterss.  etc.,  p.  74  et  seq.), 
Kliefoth,  Fliller,  Gartner  (in  their  expo.sitions), 
Pusey  (p.  58  ss.),  Volok  (Vindicia  Dan.,  p.  7 
ss. ),  [and  the  monographs  added  in  the  Intro- 
duction].— For  the  history  of  this  orthodox- 
churchly  interpretation  of  the  image  of  the  mon- 
archies in  older  times,  see  Antirjucn  et  pervul- 
gat(^  de  guatu&r  Monai-chiis  senteiitiw  plenior  et 
uberior  ansertk,  auct.  J.  G.  Jano,  1728  (also  iu 
Breyer's  Histor.  Magazin,  vol.  I.,  p.  114  et  seq.); 
and  in  relation  to  its  influence  on  the  conception 
and  representation  of  universal  history  during 
the  16th  and  17th  centuries,  see  Meusel,  Bihlio- 
t/ieca  kistorica,  vol.  I.,  pt.  1,  p.  176  ss. * 

*  [Justice  to  this  popular  view  of  the  fourth  kingdom  of 
Daniel's  prophecies,  which  applies  it  to  the  Roman  empire, 
I  either  as  a  pagan  or  a  papal  tyranny,  seems  to  require  a 
statement  here  of  the  principal  arguments  in  its  favor. 
Other  considerations  will  be  examined,  as  well  as  some  of 
these  more  in  detail,  in  the  exposition  of  the  passages  under 
which  they  arise. 

1.  The  prominence  of  the  Roman  dominion,  as  being  the 
only  really  world-wide  government  after  that  of  Ale.xander, 
certainly  lends  great  probability  to  its  selection  as  the  cul- 
mination of  the  previous  world-monarchies  in  comparison 
with  the  territorially  insignificant  realm  of  the  Seleucida;, 
But  this  argument  seems  to  us  to  be  neutralized  by  indica- 
tions in  the  text  itself,  especially  the  fact  that  Daniel's  pro- 
phecies in  this  matter  are  bounded  by  the  Orient  as  to  their 
arena  of  dominion,  the  chosen  people  of  God  and  their  local 
heritage  being  the  .stand-point  from  which  their  influence  is 
measured.  The  Jews  diil  not  come  into  any  se\ere  contact 
with  Rome  till  after  the  dawn  of  the  Messianic  era,  and  (iis 
the  author  observes  above)  Rome  itself  did  not  then  succumb 
under  the  collision.  1'he  note  of  time  **  in  the  days  of  these 
kings''  (ver.  441  cannot  be  pres.sed  into  a  corroboration  of 
this  synchronism,  for  then  it  would  co\ er  the  whole  range 
of  the  j>revious  dynasties  likewise  (see  the  exposition  of  thiil 
verse).  But  a  most  decisive  prohibition  of  the  allusitn  tc 
Rome  appears  in  the  continual  degeneration  of  the  succes 
sive  empiies  from  the  head  downwards,  till  the  fourth  i; 
deteriorated  into  a  base  metal  and  even  a  maudlin  alloy,  it 
is  true  the  epithet  "  strong  as  iron  "  well  applies  to  ftume, 
but  it  attjxined  its  culmination  both  of  force  and  culture 
under  the  early  emperors,  and  there  was  no  subseq'iem 
change  of  government  in  its  decay  corresponding  to  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  unadulterated  metal  of  the  legs  and  thf 


CHAP.  II.   1-49. 


bi 


5.  The  rehition  of  the  image  of  the  monar- 
diies^  when  correctly  interpreted,  to  the  ?iisto7'y 

crumbling  mixture  of  the  feet  and  toes.  In  the  case  of  the 
SyroGreek  monarchy,  on  the  other  hand,  all  these  particu- 
lars have  their  exact  counterpart. 

2.  The  difficulties  attendant  upon  the  effort  to  identify 
with  the  history  of  the  Seleucid  succe5;sion  the  particulars 
elsewhere  given  in  connection  with  the  fourth  empire,  es- 
pecially the  list  of  ten  kings  and  the  fall  of  three  of  them  be- 
fore the  successful  one  (chap.  vii.  24)  have  been  urged  in  fa- 
vor of  the  "ortho<iox  "  view.  But  the  Roman  interpretation, 
on  the  other  hantl.  seems  to  be  beset  with  equal  if  not  great- 
er difficulties  in  this  point,  as  will  be  seen  in  the  exposition 
of  that  passage.  Chap.  xi.  of  this  book  is  acknowledged  on 
all  hands  to  be  a  detailed  account  of  the  dyn:isty  of  the  Se- 
leucidae,  showing  that  the  prophetic  ken  had  it  prominently 
in  view;  and  the  little  horn  of  the  he-goat  (chap.  viii.  9)  is 
generally  admitted  to  be  AntiochuR  Epiphanes.  It  is  there- 
fore hard  to  resist  the  conclusion  that  the  little  horn  of  the 
fourth  beast  (chap.  vii.  S)  is  the  same  king,  and  the  fourth 
section  of  the  colossal  image  (chap.  ii.  40  et  eeq.)  the  same 
dynasty.     The  characteristics  make  the  parallel  complete. 

3.  The  violent  persecution  experienced  by  the  saints 
mder  Roman  power,  particularly  in  the  days  of  papal  su- 
premacy, has  l>een  especially  thought  to  justify  this  scheme 
oi  interpretation.  But  it  must  lie  remembered  that  the 
Seleucidse  were  the  tirst  kings  who  really  oppressed  the  peo- 
ple of  God  on  account  of  their  religion,  and  the  efforts  of 
Antiochns  to  exterminate  their  faith  were  of  the  most  extra- 
ordinary character,  not  exceeded  by  the  vinilence  of  the 
Inqu.siti'ju  itself.  Moreover,  the  attempt  to  apply  the  pro- 
phecies in  queistion  to  both  pagan  and  papal  Rome,  wenkens 
the  force  of  the  whole  intei-pretatinu.  The  effort  t^)  find  in 
the  pope,  as  such,  an  emphatic  and  direct  fulfillment  of  the 
'■  little  horn"  is  indeed  sustained  by  the  striking  analogy  of 
blnap/iemous  atrocity,  but  fails  to  find  an  equal  agreement 
with  many  other  features  of  the  picture,  e.ff.,  the  ■'  mingling 
•,hemsidves  with  the  seed  of  men  "  (chap.  ii.  43  ;  absolutely 
*orbidden  by  the  celibacy  of  the  pontiffs  and  clergy),  the 
yrigin  in  dynastic  and  territorial  revolution  ("the  sea," 
chap.  vii.  3,  and  "earth,"  chap.  v.i.  11),  the  pointed  refer- 
ence to  the  Mosaic  cultus  and  temple  (chap.  viii.  11),  and 
the  whole  tenor  uf  the  overthrow  by  civil  and  military  con- 
vulsion (chap.  xi.  40  et  seq.).  We  may  als<j  adduce  the 
gross  incongruity  of  representing  any  branch  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  however  corrupt,  under  these  heathen  symbols, 
and  a-*  the  final  foe  of  God's  people. 

4.  The  marked  simiUiriry  between  the  visions  of  Daniel 
snd  those  of  John  in  the  Revelation,  extending  to  details  of 
phraseology  as  well  as  of  emblem,  has  naturally  led  to  the 
beUef  that  they  coincide  in  application.  This  however,  in 
a  superficial  view  of  th'-ir  import.  In  the  New  Testament 
we  everywhere  find  the  symbols  and  even  the  terms  of  the 
O.  T.  used  conventionally  with  a  different  application  and 
in  a  wider  sense.  Thus,  in  our  Lord's  eschatologiciil  dis- 
course (Matt,  xxiv.),  the  symptoms  of  the  dissolution  of  Ju- 
flaism  are  made  prcinonition=i  of  the  end  of  all  thinirs;  the 
whole  of  Ezekiel's  wail  over  the  queen  of  ancient  commerce 
(chap,  xxvii.)  is  transfi-iTed  alni'^st  literaUy  to  the  apocalyp- 
tic overthrow  of  the  later  mi^tre-sof  the  world  (Rev.  xviii.) ; 
the  verj'  names,  Babylon.  Gog.  etc..  iire  applied  tf>  new- 
places  and  persons,  just  as  Sodom.  Esypt,  Zion,  etc.,  had 
long  been  current  with  a  metaphorical  meaning.  It  is  a 
gi'i-at  mistake,  however,  t**  infer  that  these  N.-T.  adapta- 
tions ot  tyjie-s  and  imager}'  and  language,  familiarly  drawn 
from  the  O.  T.,  necessjirily  denote  the  same  objects  or 
rvent*.  They  are  rather  related  as  common  types  uf  some 
recuiring  Antichrist,  as  extensions  of  one  general  world- 
pover  ever  inimiciil  to  the  cause  of  spiritual  religion.  To 
identify  them  is  to  destroy  the  significance  and  beauty  of 
the  conventional  signs  by  which  they  are  expressed.  The 
shallowness  of  this  method  of  exposition,  as  applied  to  St. 
John's  Ap:>calypse,  has  been  demonstrated  by  the  futile 
attempts  to  make  them  quadrate  with  the  facts  of  his- 
tory. 

5.  Lastlj-.  the  periods  assigned  in  Daniel  for  the  fulfill- 
ment of  the  various  prophecies,  are  appealed  to  in  support 
of  their  application  to  Rome.  This  seems  to  us,  on  the 
c  intrary.  a  fatal  argument  against  the  view  in  question. 
It  is  true  the  same  numbers  are  often  used  by  the  Reve- 
lator  for  the  length  of  "the  t.mes  and  &easona"  prefigured 
in  his  visions,  but  we  have  never  yet  seen  any  satisfactory 
adjustment  of  them  to  the  history  nf  the  Roman  empire  or 
th?  papal  church.  We  are  stronu'ly  inclined  to  that  view 
which  regards  them  as  being  conventionally  adopted  by  St. 
John  as  representations  of  longer  or  shorter  periods  of 
indefinite  length.  But  in  Daniel  they  unquestionably  de- 
n  Jto  tletcrmiuate  spaces  of  time,  and  "for  that  very  reason 
— as  they  are  all  periods  of  comparaiively  l)rief  extent  ( some 
three  and  a  half  years,  with  the  exception  of  the  notable 
terra  of  7U  weeks,  or  rather  hebdomads  ;  see  the  exposition 
of  that  passage)— they  must  be  limited  by  the  history  of 


of  tJie  founding  of  Chi^^tiaaity^  must  be  found, 
in  view  of  the  foregoing-  considerations,  in  the 
assumption  that  the  destroying  stono  represent? 
the  kingdom  of  Christ  at  the  time  of  its  intro- 
duction on  the  historical  arena,  while  the 
growth  of  the  stone  until  it  fills  the  earth,  in- 
dicates its  gradual  extension  over  all  the  coun- 
tries of  the  earth.  The  fulfillment  of  this 
closing  incident  of  the  prophetic  vision  as  a 
whole,  is  therefore  not  confined  exclusively  to 
the  initial  period  of  the  history  of  Christianity 
— as  if  the  stone  represented  the  pre-Messianic 
Israel,  or  any  other  historical  agency  prepara- 
tory to  the  advent  of  Christ ;  nor  is  it  to  be  re- 
ferred entirely  to  the  future  of  Christianity — as 
if  the  destruction  of  the  colossus  of  world-powers 
had  not  yet  transpired,  and  the  overthrow  of  the 
fourth  monarchy  were  reserved  for  the  final 
judgment  or  some  other  eschatological  event. 
The  descent  of  the  stone  and  the  overthrow  of 
the  image  were  rather  realized  in  the  historj'  of 
salvation,  when  Christ,  the  stone  that  was  re- 
jected by  the  builders,  ground  His  enemies  to 
powder,  and  became  the  elect  and  precious 
comer-stone  iu  Zion,  upon  which  all  the  foes  of 
God's  kingdom  are  henceforth  to  fall,  and  by 
which  they  are  to  be  shattered  and  put  to 
ahame  (Matt.  xxi.  43-44 ;  1  Pet.  ii.  ()-8 ; 
cf.  Isa.  viii.  14  ;  xxviii.  16).  This  closing- 
scene  of  the  vision  is  in  the  course  of  being 
steadily  and  increasingly  fulfilled,  inasmuch 
as,  on  the  one  baud,  the  destruction  and  dis- 
solution of  the  world-powers,  and  on  the  other, 
the  growth  of  the  stone  into  a  mighty  mountain 
that  fills  the  whole  earth,  are  yet  far  from  their 
Divinely  appointed  goal — however  surely  the 
world,  together  with  Satan,  its  head,  may  have 
been  long  since  judged  in  principle  bj"  the  Spirit 
of  Christ,  and  however  clearly  the  only  true  God, 
who  is  declared  in  Christ,  may  have  demon- 
strated, in  a  certain  measure,  his  nature  as  the 
all-supporting  rock,  from  all  eternity  in  the  con- 
gregation of  His  faithful  ones  (as  the  "  Rock  of 
Israel."    Gen.    xlix.  34;  Deut.  xxxii.  4  et  seq., 

the  Antiochian  jier^ecution  and  the  Maccabfean  revolution. 
The  only  escape  fritra  th.s  conclusion  is  by  a  report  to  «hat 
is  termed  the  "  year-f or-a-day  hypothesis,"  which  consists  in 
understanding  the  dayR  in  each  of  the  periods  in  question 
as  put  for  so  many  years.  It  is  sufficient  to  suy  of  this  .some- 
what popular  and  certainly  convenient  theory,  that  it  is  a 
conjecture  devoid  of  countenance  in  Scripture.  True,  the 
prophets  occasionally  make  a  1  tciTil  daj-  the  type  of  a  literal 
year,  but  they  never  do  so  without  immediately  adding  the 
explanation,  for  the  express  purpose  of  preventing  such  n 
generalization  of  the  rule.  Besides  the  passages  in  Gen.  i. 
5  et  seq. ;  ii.  4  :  2  Peter  iJi.  S  (which  would  prove  too 
much),  the  only  instances  of  this  usage  adduced  are  Num. 
xiv.:^;  Ezek.  iv,  1-b;  Dan.  ix.  :i4  (but  this  is  not  in  point); 
Rev.  ii.  10  (but  here  the  appl.cation  is  a  pure  assumption) ; 
Rev.  xi.  'J-11  (an  equally  imaginary  case) ;  Rev.  xi.  2,  3,  au<l 
xii.  6,  14  (to  include  which  is  a  simple  petitin  princi)}ii); 
Ri'v.  XX.  6  (a  rather  difficult  case — think  ot  a  millennium  of 
ytio.OOO  years!).  See  the  exhaustive  list  by  Dr.  Pond,  in 
the  ^fetll.  Quar.  Hev.  for  Jan.,  1874,  p.  llli  sq.  ;  where  the 
learned  writer  argues  that  if  one  part  of  a  vision  be  a  sjTn- 
bol  so  must  the  rest,  e.g.,  if  the  locusus  in  Rev.  ix.,  be  sym- 
bolical (which  is  probably  true  only  so  far  as  they  are  a 
type  of  ruin  in  general,  not  any  particular  form  or  agency), 
so  must  the  nccompanying  number  be  ;  ergn,  the  "5  months" 
of  ver.  5  must  denote  150  jcars  —  just  as  if  the  number 
might  not  be  symbolical  of  an  indefinite  period,  as  it  no 
doubt  is.  We  conclude,  therefore,  by  reiterating  that  no 
clear  instance  can  be  .idduced  of  the  use  of  a  "day"  in  Scrip' 
tural  prophecy  for  an  exact  year,w/iere  the  ty!)ii:al  charac- 
ter of  the  lime  in  not  immeJiniely  exjjrensed  as  being  lim- 
ited to  thiit  particular  ca.se.  much  less  is  there  any  iutima- 
tiim  that  such  a  rule  is  to  apply  to  prophecy  in  general.  To 
admit  such  a  principle  in  Biblical  interp rotation  is  to  ftbfto- 
don  all  precision  in  the  nsc  of  languagu.] 


ts 


THE  PROPHET  DAIilEL. 


Isa.  XXX.  29 ;  xliv.  8 ;  1  Sam.  ii.  2,  etc. ;  cf. 
the  "  rock  of  strength,"  Isa.  xvii.  10  ;  "  rock 
of  eternities."  Isa.  xxvi.  4;  "  rock  of  refuge," 
Psa.  xciv.  22,  etc.). — Here  again  we  are  com- 
pelled to  reject  several  partial  conceptions : 

(it.)  The  identification  of  the  stone  or  fifth  mon- 
archy with  the  Roman  dominion  (Grotius),  which 
clearly  leads  to  an  improper  naturalizing  of  the 
pass.ige,  so  far  as  it  confines  itself  simply  to  the 
earthly  relations  of  the  historical  Roman  empire; 
hut  which  certainly  includes  an  important  meas- 
ure of  truth  in  so  far  as  it  regards  the  Roman 
world-power  as  a  Divinely  chosen  and  sanctioned 
bearer  and  promoter  of  the  royal  Messianic  cause 
at  the  stage  of  its  introduction  (cf.  supra,  No.  4). 

(I).)  The  one-sided  and  exclusive  reference  of 
the  stone  to  the  people  of  Israel  (older  Jewish 
expositors  ;  Porphyry  ; — see,  on  the  other  hand, 
Jerome  on  the  passage) . 

(c.)  That  interpretation  of  the  stone  by  which 
it  symbolizes  merely  the  person  of  the  Messio/i, 
as  distinct  from  the  kingdom  founded  by  Him 
(Cosmos  Indicopleustes,  and  several  rabbins,  as 
Saadia,  Ibn-Ezra,  etc. ;  and,  after  them,  especially 
J.  Clir.  Beermann.  De  monarchia  qnnrtn,  in  his 
Meditntt.  xiolitic(f.  10T9,  where  he  submits  an  in- 
terpretation of  the  several  kingdoms  that  is 
otherwise  entirely  correct ;  cf.  Bertlioldt,  as 
above,  p.  215  et  seq.,  in  relation  to  Beermann, 
and  partially  against  him). 

(rf. )  The  reference  of  the  stone,  not  to  the 
first,  but  to  the  second  advent  of  Christ,  and  al- 
so to  the  erection  of  the  Apocalyptic  millennium, 
which  is  said  to  constitute  the  "  fifth  monarchy," 
according  to  the  true  and  actual  meaning  of  the 
prophet.  This  view  was  held  by  the  Chiliasts 
(Enthusiasts,  Anabaptists)  of  the  16th  and  17th 
centuries,  and  especially  by  the  fanatical  sect 
of  Quintomonarchists  or  Fifth-monarchy  men  in 
England  at  the  time  of  Cromwell  (see  Weingar- 
tcn.  Die  Rfrolutionskirchen  Engliin<U,  Berlin, 
1868,  p.  180  et  seq.);  also  by  several  recent  ex- 
positors of  a  subtile-chiliastictendency, especially 
Anberlen  (p.  42  et  seq.  ;  248  et  seq.  ; — in  opposi- 
tion to  him  see  Kranichfeld.  p.  118  et  seq.).  Sev- 
eral earlier  exegetes  of  pietistic-chiliasticor  theo- 
sophic  temper,  e.'j.,  Joach.  Lange,  Starke,  M.  Fr. 
Roos,  Mencken,  etc..  contented  themselves  with 
finding  a  prophetic  reference  to  the  millennium  in 
the  final  destiny  of  the  stone,  hence  in  its  de- 
velopment to  a  greatness  that  fills  and  controls 
the  earth,  whicli  is  entirely  admissible  in  view 
of  the  above. 

(i.  The  practical  and  homiUtical  treatment  of 
this  chapter  will  dwell  predominantly  on  either 
its  historical  or  its  prophetic  features.  The 
leading  subjects  for  consideration  will  be  either 
the  answer  to  Daniel's  jirayer  and  his  jiromo- 
tion  above  the  heathen  wise-men.  or  the  tri- 
umph of  the  kingdom  of  God  over  the  world- 
powers. 

a.  The  former  theme  is  immediately  connected 
with  the  subject  of  the  preceding  chapter,  since 
Daniel's  jiromotion  and  honor  were  merely  ad- 
ditional fruits  of  the  faithful  obedience,  which 
had  already  in  that  connection  been  pr.aised  as 
the  source  and  basis  of  his  greatness.  Especially 
suitable  texts  may  be  found  in  the  prayer  of 
Daniel  and  his  friends,  vs.  16-23,  and  in  the 
closing  verses  46-49.  Compare  Calvin's  obser- 
vation on  V.  IC  :  "  ViVteftus,  quo  coiisilU),  et  qua 
tti>im  Jiducin  Daniel  poHuincenl,    'einpus  sibi 


dari.  Cormlium  hoe  fiat  ut  Dei  gratiam  implo- 
raret  ,  .  .  .  Non  duUmn  eH,  quin  sperarerit 
Daniel,  quod  adepttcs  eM,  nempe  somnium  regis 
sibi  reDelatum  iri.  Exponit  ergo  sociis  suit,  ut 
simid  postulent  misericordiam  a  Deo."  Also 
Chr,  B.  Michaelis  on  the  same  passage  :  "  Dan- 
iel eadem  fide,  qua  postmodum  ova  leonnm  ob- 
strinxit  (Heb.  xi.  3),  hie  solutionem  somnii,  quod 
necdumnonerat,  NebucJuidnezaripromittit,  certus 
jam  de  exauditione  precum,  qu/u  super  hoc  re  ad 
Deuni  fusurus  erat  (Jas.  i.  6)."— On  v.  19  cf. 
Jerome:  ^'■Somnium  regis  suo  discit  somnio; 
immo  et  somnium  et  interpretationem  ejus  Dei 
revelatione  cognoseit.  quod  dcemones  ignwabant, 
sapientia  saieuli  scire  non  poterat.  Unde  et 
Apostoli  mysterium,  quod  cnnctis  retro  genera- 
tionibus  fuerat  ignotum.  Domino  revelante  cog- 
noscunt  (Eph.  iii.  5)."*— On  v.  22  see  Starke  : 
"If  many  things  in  the  Word  of  God  are  too 
deep  and  hidden  for  thee,  the  fault  is  not  in  the 
Word,  but  in  thyself.  Beseech  God  to  enlighten 
thy  dark  heart,  and  thou  shalt  understand  the 
depths  of  God's  Word  with  ever-increasing  clear- 
ness."— Notice  also  the  evidence  of  Daniel's  pro- 
found humility  and  modesty  in  v.  23  J:  Thou 
"  hast  made  known  unto  me  now  vJiat  v.e  desired 
of  thee ;"  on  which  Jerome  (and  after  him 
Theodoret,  Calvin,  etc.)  correctly  observes; 
"  Quod  guatuor  rogant,  uni  ostenditur.  vt  et 
arrogantiam  fugiat.  ne  solus  impetrasse  rideatur, 
et  agat  gratias,  quod  mysterium  smnni  solus 
audierit.^^ — In  treating  the  closing  paragraph, 
vs.  46-49,  notice  particularly  that  it  is  a  heathen 
ruler,  a  worshipper  of  idols,  who  is  compelled 
to  exalt  and  glorify  Daniel  and  his  God.  Calvin 
(on  V.  47) :  '•  Profani  homines  interdum  rapiiin- 
tur  in  admiration  em  Dei,  et  tunc  large  et  prolixe 
fatentur,  guicguid  posset  requiri  a  veris  Dei 
cultoribus.  Sed  iUud  est  momentaneum  :  deinde 
interea  manent  impliciti  suis  supeistionibus.  Ex- 
torquet  igitur  illis  Deus  rerba,  gmim  ita  pie 
hquiintur,  sed  inlus  retinent  sua  mti(i,ut  facile 
postea  recidant  ad  pristinos  mores,  quemad- 
modum  memorabile  exemphim.  postea  sequetur. 
Quicguid  sit.  voluit  Deus  ore  prof  am  regis  ghriam 
suam  promulgari.  et  ilium  esse  pi-acone^n  sua 
potentio'  et  sui  mnninis." 

b.  With  regard  to  the  prophetic  contents  of 
Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  as  brought  out  in  Dan- 
iel's interpretation,  vs.  37-44,  Melancthon  justly 
comprehends  that  the  political  element  must  in 
this  connection  be  decidedly  subordinate  to  the 
religious  and  Messianic  factor,  and  observes: 
'■  Ueeo  enarratio  non  tantum  est  politica  de  im- 
perils, sed  prabet  etiam  ocaisionem  Danieli  con- 
ciiinandi  de  toto  regno  Christi,  de  novissimo 
jiidicio,  de  causa  peccati,  de  redemptione  et  in- 
stauratione  liumani  generis  ;  cur  sit  tanta  mundi 
breritas  ;  quale  sit  futurum  perpetuum  regnum, 
utrum  ill  hac  iwtura  immunda  vel  alia  ;  qtialis  sit 
futurus  Redemtor,  et  qumnodo  ad  hoc  regnum 
perceniatur.  Jia  hwc  brecis  narratio  eomplectitur 
sutnmam  Ecangelii.''' — Cf.    Calvin   (on'  v.   44) : 


*  TertulIian'R  assertion  {dejfovn.,  c.  7).  with  reference  to 
vs.  1-19.  that  Daniel  and  his  friends  fasted  during  three 
days,  and  that  for  this  reason  their  prayer  was  heard,  has 
its  foundation  in  the  fact  that  he  (or  ratlier  the  pre-Jero- 
Diian  Latin  version  of  the  Bible  used  by  him)  f.ill,,wed  an 
ancient  ascetic  interpolation  of  the  passage,  «hich  is  still 
found  in  the  Septnagint :  <eat  iropijyyetAe  vntm^av  Kd\  ht-r^trtv. 
Kai  Ti/xuptaf  frjnjo-ai.— Cf.  the  similar  ascetic  exten.slon 
which  the  passage  1  Cor.  vii.  5  experit-nced  at  an  eirly  day, 
by  the  interpolation  of    the  words  r^   in^irttla  before  rji 

TliKKltVxi- 


CHAP.  m.  1-30. 


89 


"  Summa  igitur  est:  quamris  visuri  sint  Judcei 
potentU&ima  imperia,  qua  malum  et  terrorem 
ipsis  incutiant.,  immo  reddaiit  fere  attonitos, 
Uimen  nikU  in  iUis  fore  stabile  rel  Jinnum,  quod 
scilicet  cfnitraria  sint  regno  fUii  Dei.  Atqui  male- 
dictionem  denuntiut  Jesaias  (c.  Ix.  12)  omnibus 
regnis,  qua  non  sortierint  ecdesiee  Dei.  Quum 
ergo  omnes  iUi  monarchce  diabolica  audacia  erexe- 
rint  cristas  adeersus  JUium  Dei,  oportuit  deleri, 
et  in  iUis  consjticuam  fieri  Dei  maledictionem,  qum 
Tutbetur    apud  prophetam.     Sic    ergo    contririt 

Christtu  omnia    mundi   imperia. Hortatur 

propheta  (Psa.  ii.  13)  omnes  reges  terra,  ut 
mcuUntur  FUium.  Quum  neque  Bahylonii, 
neqiie  Persm,  neque  Macedones,  neque  Romani 
Christo  sese  subjecerint,  immo  omnes  suas  vires 
eontulerint  ad  ipsnm  oppugnandum  et  fuennt 
Jwstes  pietatis,  opportuit  deleri  a  Christo  regno, 
....  Neque  etiam  liic  Daniel  ea  tanturn 
attinyit,  gum  patent  oculis  hominum,  sed  altius 
attoUit  mentes  nostras,  nempe  ut  sciamus,  non 
alibi  veram  fulturam,  in  qua  quiescamus,  posse 
reperiri.  quam  in  imo  Christi  (1  Cor.  iii.  3). 
Extra  Christum  ergo prouuntiat  quieqiiid  splen- 
d^ris  et  potentiee  est  in  mundo  et  opulentia  et  ro- 
boris,  hoc  esse  aiducum  et  inralidum  et  nuUius 
momenti." — Starke  (after  Geier,  on  t.  44)  :  "All 
the  kingdoms  of  earth  are  subject  to  change, 


but  Christ's  kingdom  shall  endure  for  ever,  and 
no  violence  can  accomplish  its  overthrow " 
(Matt.  xiv.  19).— Id.  (on  v.  37  et  seq.)  :  "  If 
God  foreknows  so  exactly  all  changes  in  the 
world-kingdoms,  and  if  He  governs  them  all  by 
His  wisdom,  should  He  not  know  the  changes 
which  are  to  transpire  in  His  church  ?  Should 
He  not  control  them  for  good  ? "  (Matt.  x.  29, 
30). — Menken  {Das  ilona rchienbUd,  p.  83): 
"  The  object  for  which  God  created  the  world, 
and  the  end  for  which  He  governs  it,  is  the  king- 
dom of  God.  The  kingdom  of  God  is  the  in- 
visible root  which  holds  and  sustains  the  world- 
kingdoras.  the  invisible  power  which  smites  and 
destroys  them.  Their  more  or  less  intimate 
connection  with  the  kingdom  of  God  decides  the 
duration,  the  importance,  the  significance  of 
world-kingdoms.  The  fate  and  the  history  of 
all  the  kingdoms  of  earth,  that  have  no  impor- 
tant connection  with  the  kingdom  of  God,  or  no 
connection  at  all,  would  be  of  no  value.  What- 
ever may  be  their  history,  it  is  always  unimpor- 
tant, because  they  exert  no  influence  whatever, 
or  at  best  a  very  limited  influence,  upon  the 
postponing  or  hastening  of  the  final  development 
of  things,  upon  the  supplanting  of  the  world- 
kingdoms  by  the  kingdom  of  God." 


9 
10 


11 


3.   The  test  of  the  faith  of  DanieCs  Hiree  friends  in  the  fiery  furnace. 
Chap.  III.  1-30. 

1  Nebuchaihiezzar  tlie  king  made  an  image  of  gold,  whose  [its]  height  was 
threescore  cubits, ««(/  the  breadth  thereof  [its  breadth]  six  cubits:  lie  set  it  up  in 

2  the  plain  of  Dura,  in  the  province  of  Babylon.  Then  [And]  Nebuchadnezzar 
the  king  sent  to  gather  together  the  princes  [satraps],  the  governors,  and  the 
captains  [pashas],  the  judges,  the  treasurers,  the  counsellors,  the  sheriffs 
[lawyeis],  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  provinces,' to  come  to  </te  dedication  of  the 

3  image  which  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  had  set  up.  Then  the  princes,  the  gov- 
ernors, and  captains,  the  judges,  the  treasurers,  the  counsellors,  the  sherifls,  and 
all  the  rulers  of  the  pirovinces,  v:e.re  gathered  together  unto  the  dedication  of  the 
image  that  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king/(fK/  set  up  ;  and  they  stood  \were  standing] 

4  before  the  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar  ha<l  set  up.  Then  [And  a  herald  cried 
aloud  [with  might],   To  you  it  is  commanded  [lit.  they  are  saying],  O   Uit.  The] 

•'>  people,  nations  [nations,  peoples],  and  languages,^  That  at  what  time  the  time 
that]  ye  hear  [shall  hear]  the  sound  of  the  cornet  [horn],  flute,  harp,  sackbut, 
psaltery,    dulcimer    [symphony],   and     all    kinds   of   music,    ye   fall    down    and 

6  worship  the  golden  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  hath  set  up:  and 
whoso  [Zti.who  that]  falleth  not  [lit.  shall  not  fall]  doionund  worshippeth,  shall  the 
same  hour  [lit.m  it  the  moment]   be  cast   into  </(e  midst  of  a  [or,  the]    burning 

7  fiery  furnace  [lit.  o\Qn  of  fire  the  blazing].  Therefore  at  that  [lit.  in  it  the]  time, 
when  [lit.  as  that]  all  the  people  heard  [nations  were  hearing]  the  sound  of  the 
cornet,  flute,  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery,  and  all  kinds  of  music,'  all  the  people,  the 
nations,  and  the  languages,  fell  [were  falling]  down  and  worshipped  [worshippinir] 

8  the  golden  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  had  set  up.  Wherefore  at 
that  time  certain  Chaidjeans  [tit.  men  Casdim]  came  near  and  accused  the 
Jews.      They   spake    [vjere  answering],  and   said    [were   saying]    to   the   king 

Nebuchadnezzar,  O  [lit.  The]  king,  live  for  ever.  Thou,  O  king,  hast  made  a 
decree,  that  every  man  that  shall  hear  the  sound  of  the  cornet,  flute,  harp, 
sackbut,  psaltery,  and  dulcimer,  and  all  kinds  of  music,  shall  fall  down  and 
worship  the  golden  image;    and   whoso    falleth   not  down   and   worshippeth 


00  THE  PROPHnr  DANIEL. 


12  that  he  should  be  cast  into  the  midst  of  a  burning  fiery  furnace.  There  are 
certain  Jews,  whom  thou  hast  set  over  the  aifairs  [work]  of  the  province  of 
Babylon,  Shadrach,  Mesliaeh,  and  Abed-nego:  these  men,  O  king,  have  not 
regarded   thee  [set  account  upon  thee] ;  they  serve  not  thy  gods,  nor  worship 

13  the  golden  image  which  thou  hast  set  up.  Then  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  his  rage 
and  fury,  commanded  [said]  to  bring  [cause  to  come]  Shadraeh,  Meshach,  and 
Abed-nego.     Then  they  brouglit  these  men  [these  men    were  brought]   before 

14  the  king.  Nebuchadnezzar  spake,  and  said  unto  them,  Is  it  true  [o/' purpose], 
0  Shadraeh,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  ?  do  not  ye  [,  ^^rt^yedo  not]   serve   my 

15  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  wliich  I  have  set  up?  Now,  if  ye  be  ready, 
that  at  what  time  [the  time  that]  ye  hear  the  sound  of  the  cornet,  flute,  harp, 
sackbut,  psaltery,  and  dulcimer,  and  all  kinds  of  music,  ye  fall  down  and  wor- 
ship the  image  which  I  have  made,  loell ;  but  [and]  if  ye  worship  not,  yc  shall 
be  cast  the  same  hour  [moment]  into  the  midst  of  a  burning  fiery  furnace ;  and 

16  who  is  that  [he]  God  that  shall  deliver  you  out  of  my  hands?  Shadraeh,  Me- 
shach, and  Abed-nego  answered  and  said  to  the  king,  0  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  are 

17  not  careful  [needing]  to  answer  thee  [return  thee  answer]  in  this  matter.  Hit 
be  so,  our  God  [If  it  be  that  our  God]  whom  we  serve,  is  able  to  deliver  us 
from     the    burning    fiery    furnace;    and    he    will    deliver    us   out     of     thy 

18  hand,  O  king.'  But  [And]  if  not,  be  it  known  unto  thee,  O  king,  that 
we  ivill  not  serve  [are  not  serving]  thy  gods,  nor  worship   tlie  golden    image 

19  which  thou  hast  set  up.  Then  was  Nebuchadnezzar  full  of  fury,  and  <Ae  form  of 
his  visage  was  changed  against  Shadraeh,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego:  therefo^-e 
he  spake,  and  commanded  that  they  should  he.at  [to  heat]  the  furnace  one  seven 
times  more  than  it  was  wont  to  be  heated  \lit.  above  that  any  one   was   ever  seen 

20  to  heat  it].  And  he  commanded  the  most  mighty  men  \lit.  men,  heroes  of  might] 
that  were  in  liis  army  to  bind  Shadraeh,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  and  [so  as]  to 

21  cast  them  into  the  burning  fiery  furnace.  Then  these  men  were  bound  in  their 
coats  [shirts,  or  trowsers,  or  mantles],  their  hosen  [coats,  or  tunics],  and  their 
hats  [cloaks,  or  turbans,]  and  t\ie\v  other  garments,  and  were  cast  i«to  the  midst 

22  of  the  burning  fiery  furnace.  Therefore,  because  [lit.  from  that]  the  king's  com- 
mandment [word]  VMS  urgent,  and  the  furnace  exceeding  hot,  the  flame  of  tlie 

23  fire  slew  those  men  that  took  u])  Shadraeh,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego.'  And 
these  three  men,  Sliadrach,  Mesliaeh,  and  Abed-nego,  fell  down  bound  into  the 

24  midst  of  the  burning  fiery  furnace.  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  was  astonished, 
and  rose  iq^  i"  baste,  and  spake  and  said  unto  his  counsellors.  Did  not  we  cast 
three  men  bound  into  the  midst  of  the  fire?'     They  answered  and  said  unto  the 

25  king,  True,'  O  king.  He  answered  and  said,  Lo,  I '  see  four  men  loose  [loosed], 
walking  in  the  midst  of  the  fire,  and  they  have  no  hurt  [harm  is  not  with  them]; 
and  the  form   [appearance]  of  the  fourth  is  like  the  Son  of  God  [a   son  of  the 

26  gods].  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  came  near  to  <^e  mouth  [door]  of  the  burning  fierj 
furnace,  and  S])ake,  and  said,  Shadraeh,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  ye  servants 
of  the  most  high  God,  come  [go]  forth,  and  come  hither.  Then  Shadraeli. 
Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  came  [went]  forth   of  [from]   the  midst  of  the  fire. 

27  And  the  princes,  [the]  governors,  and  [the]  captains,  and  the  king's  counsellors, 
being  gatliered  together,  saw  [or,  were  gathered  and  saw]  these  men,  upon  [over] 
whose  bodies  the  fire  had  no  power  [did  not  rule],  nor  was  a  [the~\  hair  of  their 
head   singed,  neither  were  [had]  their  coats  changed,  nor  the  smell  of  fire  had 

28  passed  on  tliem.  Tlien  Nebuchadnezzar  spake  and  said.  Blessed  he  the  God  of 
Shadraeh,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  who  hath  sent  his  angel,  and  delivered  his 
servants  that  trusted  in  him,  and  have  changed'  the  king's  word,  and  yielded 
their  bodies,  tliat  they  might  not  serve  or  worship  any  god  except  their  oivn 

29  God.  Therefore  I  inake  a  decree  [And  fiom  me  is  a  decree  made].  That 
every  people,  nation,  and  language,  which  [shall]  speak  anything  amiss  '°  against 
the  God  of  Shadraeh,  JMesliach,  and  Abed-nego,  shall  be  cut  [made]  in  pieces, 
and  their  h(mses  "  shall  he  made  a  dunghill  [or,  sink]  ;  because  there  is  no  other 

80  god  that  can  deliver  after  [like]  this  sort.  Then  the  king  promoted  Shadraeh, 
Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  in  the  province  of  Babylon. 


CHAP.  III.  1-30. 


di 


CRITICAL    NOTES. 

1  [These  are  apparently  t<^hnical  tenna  for  various  classes  of  officers,  who  are  carefully  distinguiahed  and  graded,  and 
may  be  represented  as  follows : 

i  Satraps,  |  I  Provinces. 

I.     -^  PmfeLt^,  J- Governmental, ■<  DLstricts. 

J  ( Metropolis. 


II. 


I. 


")  Treasurers, 
\  Judges^ 


Courtly, 


i  Executive. 
"if  Financial. 
-,_    J  Judges^  (.  r       I  J  ^^  ^^^  bench. 

^^^*  1  Lawyers.  \  ^^''  "}  At  the  bar, 

IV.  — Superintendenfs. — Functional — General.] 
^   [There  is  in  these  three  terms  likewise  cleiu*ly  a   gradation  downwards:  ncUion$^  tribes^  dialects.] 
*  [In  these  names  of  musical  instruments,  some  borrowed  from  foreign  languages,  and  all  more  or  less  uncertain 
of  import,  there  are  nevertheless  traces  of  classincation : 
I  Cornet,     [  ^[r-    ,        \  Simple. 
\  Flute.        r^""^       1  Keyed. 


[wind, 

[  Guitar.,     J  [ 

II.    \  Lyre,        >  String,  \  Gradually  more  complex 

I  Unrv-      S  I 


III.  — Bagpipe. — Wind — Compound. 
IV   — Ail  aori*.— General,] 

*  \.'"^    linl^'p    ibDS,  lit.,  ate  their  pieces  of.  I.e.,  slandered;  cent.  English  "backbite."] 

*  [The  iIa.soretic  interpunction  requires  us  to  punctuate  thus:  to  deliver  us  ;  from  the  burning  fiery  furnace  and 
from  thy  Itand,   O  king,  lie  will  deliver.] 

*  [The  pcsition  of  the  terra  for  the  executioners  is  verj'  emphatic  in  the  original ;  literally,  those  men^  who  lifted 

t/i£  Jiame  of  the  fire  i-itleit  them.] 

*  [The  order  of  the  words  in  the  original  is  emphatic ;  "  Waa  it  not  three  men  ice  caM  into  [to]  the  midst  of  the  fire- 
bound  f"  This  last  was  an  additional  circumstance  of  wonder. — '  5<2'^2'^  may  be  the  fem.  or  the  "deflnit*  state;" 
in  eithercase  it  is  emphatic,  i.  q.,  *'  the  truth." — s  The  pronoun,  being  expressed,  is  emphatic,  i".  7.,  "  I  myself."  The 
others  appear  to  have  been  so  situated  as  not  to  observe  this  fact,  or  did  not  Dot.:ce  it. — «  TT,lij  being  in  Pael,  so  far  aa 
the  form  is  concerned,  is  smiply  transitive;  but  the  context  gives  it  the  sense  of  contravene,  common  in  the  cognate 
Syriac— '»  nb'i'i  Keri  li™i  something  astray,  an  error  or  wrong  word,  *.  e.,  detraction.— "  nrPa>  his  iMUse,  i.  e., 
the  house  of  any  individual  so  doing.] 


EXEGETICAL   RESIARKS. 

Verses  1,  3.  Thu-  erection  of  the  image,  and  the 
command  to  fittend  itK  dediciition.  Nebuchad- 
nezzar the  king  made  (had  made)  an  image  of 
gold.  Properly  "made"  ("27),  similar  to  the 
repeated  phrase  in  the  following  :  "  he  set  it  up," 
in.stead  of  ''  he  caused  it  to  be  set  up  "  (verses  1  A, 
2,  'A, .').  7,  12,  etc.),  or  to  ver.se  34,  "  we  cast  three 
men  into  the  fite,'"  instead  of  "  had  them  cast  in." 
— The  Hob.  text  does  not  state  token  the  image 
was  made.  According  to  the  Septuagiut  and 
Theodotion,  who  are  followed  by  the  Syriac  hex- 
aplar  version,  it  was  prepared  crni%  uKvuKunSiKanw 
Haiai'x  iiWvoCT'y/i,  heuce  at  about  the  time  of  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  (cf.  3  Kings  xxv.  8  ; 
Jer.  lii.  12),  and  after  the  accomplished  subjec- 
tion to  ChaldEea  of  all  the  nations  from  India  to 
Ethiopia  (cf.  the  additions  in  the  Sept.  to  verses 
2  "nd  'S).  The  incident  appears  at  all  events  to 
belong  to  this  later  period  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
reign,  since  verses  4  4,  7  6,  29  a,  mention  mivny 
"  people.s,  nation.s,  and  languages,"  a.s  being  sub- 
ject to  him,  and  it  was  possibly  a  feature  con- 
nected with  a  feast  in  commemoration  of  his 
victories  (cf.  Herodot.  IV.  88).  The  impression 
of  Jehovah's  power  and  greatness  which  he  had 
formerly  received  in  consequence  of  Daniel's 
interpretation  of  his  dream,  appears  therefore  to 
have  been  long  obliterated.  He  not  only  causes 
the  colossal  image  subsequently  described  to  be 
erected  in  honor  of  some  Babylonian  national 
god,  but  with  arrogant  presumption  he  chal- 
lenges a  conflict  (see  verse  l.")). — An  image  of  gold. 
C,"i  certainly  designates  in  this  place,  as  well 
as  in  chap.  ii.  iM.  a  statue  in  the  human  form, 
and  more  particularly,  the  image  of  a  god,  as 
appears  from  verses  13,  18,  38.  It  was  not  there- 


fore a  statue  of  Nebuchadnezzar  himself.  A 
marked  disproportion  seems  to  have  existed  in 
its  dimensions,  on  the  supposition  that  it  repre- 
sented an  upright  human  form,  since  its  height 
is  given  at  sixty  cubits,  and  its  breadth  or 
thickness  at  only  six  cubits,  while  the  normal 
height  and  breadth  of  a  person  in  an  upright 
posture  are  as  6  :  1,  not  as  10  :  1.  For  this 
reason  the  cb^  has  been  held  to  have  been  in 
part  a  mere  idol  column,  similar  to  the  Egyptian 
obelisks,  or,  which  is  certainly  more  appropriate, 
analogous  to  the  Amyclaean  Apollo,  which  formed, 
according  to  Pausanius  (  Lacon.  III.  19,  2),  a  slen- 
der column  provided  with  head,  arms,  and  feet, 
in  the  human  form.  So  M^nter,  lidiy.  (ler  Baby- 
loiiier,  p.  .59  ;  Hengstcnberg,  p.  95  ;  and  more  re- 
cently Kranichfeld,  who  refers  to  the  colossus  of 
Rhodes,  the  height  of  which  was  seventy  cubits, 
also  to  the  Egj-ptian  ko'/ /.uooin  /At}c.?.ot  and  lii'ii^d- 
ooi;>ff  mentioned  by  Herodotus  (II.  175),  and  to 
the  image  of  the  sun  mentioned  by  Pliny  (//.  iV". 
xxiv.  18),  which  reached  a  height  of  110  feet, 
in  addition  to  the  Apollo  of  Amyclje.  ["c'?2 
is  properly  an  image  in  human  likenesn,  and  ex- 
cludes the  idea  of  a  mere  pillar  or  obelisk,  for 
which  n25:?3  would  have  been  the  appropriate 
word.  Yet ...  .  as  to  the  upper  part — the 
head,  countenance,  arms,  breast — it  may  have 
been  in  the  form  of  a  man.  and  the  lower  part 
may  have  been  formed  like  a  pill.ir." — Keil.] 
We  might  be  content  with  this,  or  refer  in  ad- 
dition to  the  remarkably  tall  and  slender  forms 
of  individual  persons  on  Egyptian  wall-painting» 
and  also  on  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  sculptures 
(cf.  the  copies  in  Wilkinson's  Manners  and  cus- 
tam.i  of  the  ancient  Egi/ptians.  and  Layard's  workt 
on  Nineveh  and  Babylon  [German  by  Th.Zenkerl 
— in  the  latter,  e.g. ,  the  co  ossal  sitting  tigure  on 


y2 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


plate  XXII.  A),  if  it  were  not  still  more  suitable  to 
regard  the  statement  of  the  height  of  sixty  cubits 
as  asjTiecdoche,  designating  both  the  image  and 
its  pedestal,  and  to  allow  to  the  latter  perhaps 
twenty-four,  and  to  the  former  thirty-six  cubits, 
which  assumption  clearly  results  in  an  entirely 
well-proportioned  shape  of  the  statue.  If  there- 
fore, the  sis  proper  was  Umited  to  a  height  of 
about  thirty-six  feet,  it  would  compare  with 
the  statue  of  Belus,  which,  according  to  Diodor. 
II.  9,  was  erected  by  Semiramis  on  the  summit 
of  the  great  temple  of  Bel  at  Babylon  (probably 
the  present  "Birs  Nimroud  "),  and  attained  a 
height  of  forty  feet ;  but  it  can  hardly  be  directly 
identified  (with  Bertholdt)  with  that  statue  of 
Bel,nor  yet  with  the  one  mentioned  by  Herodotus 
(I.  183),  which  measured  twelve  cubits  in  height. 
Not  only  was  it  erected  outside  of  the  temple 
area  of  Babylon,  and  possibly  even  at  a  consider- 
able distance  from  the  city  itself  (see  infra),  but 
it  is  also  extremely  questionable  whether  an 
image  of  Bel  must  be  assumed  in  this  case,  since 
the  Babylonians  were  devoted  to  the  zealous 
worship  of  numerous  gods.  Entirely  too  artifi- 
cial is  the  opinion  of  Hofmann  (  Weiss,  iind 
ErfilUuiig.  I.  277),  Ziindel,  and  Kliefoth,  that 
the  image  was  designed  by  Nebuchadnezzar  to 
represent  the  world-power  he  had  founded,  in 
harmony  with  the  religious  (cosmical  1  conceptions 
of  heathenism — as  indicated  (according  to  Klie- 
foth) particularly  by  the  numbers  six  and  sixty. 
— The  expression  :n~~"il  does  not  compel  us  to 
assume  that  the  image  was  composed  through- 
out of  solid  gold  ;  for  in  Ex.  xxxvii.  35  et  seq. 
an  altar  of  wood,  and  merely  covered  with 
plates  of  gold,  is  designated  simply  as  "nai^ 
Syjn  ;  and  Isa,  xl.  19 ;  xli.  7  ;  Jer.  x.  3-5  in- 
dicate plainly  that  the  images  of  Babylonian  idols 
especially  were  usually  compot:ed  of  wood  with 
an  outside  covering  of  gold.  The  construction 
of  this  image  by  no  means,  therefore,  involved 
an  immoderate  expenditure,  as  J.  D.  MichaeUs 
supposed  ;  and  the  gold  required  to  cover  its 
surface  may  have  been  less,  in  weiglit  and  value, 
than  the  amount  required  (80(1  talents)  for  the 
construction  of  the  statue  of  Bel  already  referred 
to  as  mentioned  by  Herodotus,  whose  height  was 
twelve  cubits,  and  for  the  tables  and  chairs 
which  accompanied  it ;  and  also  less  than  the 
amount  expended  on  the  statue  of  Bel  mentioned 
by  Diodorus,  which  reached  a  height  of  forty 
cubits,  and  cost,  as  is  reported,  1,000  talents. 
The  relative  unimportance  of  this  image,  which 
is  thus  so  easy  to  conceive,  deprives  the  argu- 
mentum  c.r  silent io  of  all  its  force,  as  against 
the  credibility  of  the  narrative,  which  Von  Len- 
gerke  and  Hitzig  have  assigned  to  it,  on  the 
ground  of  its  not  being  mentioned  by  profane 
authors.  Finally,  it  is  thoroughly  inconsequent 
and  ridiculous  to  discover,  with  Bleek  (in  Schlei- 
erm.,  Liicke,  etc.  ;  T/ied.  Zeitschr.,  1822,  III., 
p.  209 ;  ct.  Eiid.  im  A.  T.,  %  265),  an  imaginary 
prototype  of  the  liiU'/vyua  ipj/uuneuc  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  which  was  assigned  by  pseudo-Daniel 
to  the  a;ra  of  the  captivity  ;  for  according  to  1 
Mace.  i.  54,  59,  this  .Mf/  .  was  not  a  statue  at  all, 
but  an  altar  of  small  size,  erected  on  the  altar 
of  burnt  offerings  at  Jerusalem  (cf.  Hcngsten- 
berg.  p.  80). — Whose  height  was  threescore 
cubits,  and  the  breadth  thereof    six   cubits. 


"'riB<  properly  "  breadth,"  but  here  signifying 
both  breadth  and  thickness,  cf.  Ez.  vi.  3.  The 
cubits  (l"^S-)  were  probably  the  royal  cubits  of 
the  Babylonians  (Herod.  I.  178),  and  not  smaller 
than  the  ordinary  cubits  iGesen. ,  Tfieaaur.,  p. 
112  s.).  Instead  of  x^Xffwr  e^r/xmra  as  a  statement 
of  the  height,  the  Septuagint  has  -f/xsui'  c;,  which 
reading  some  have  endeavored  to  defend,  e.  g., 
MichaeUs,  Eichhom,  etc.  ;  but  is  it  probably  not 
even  an  ancient  attempt  to  provide  an  ea.sier  read- 
ing, and  must  be  considered  merely  as  the  error  of 
a  copyist,  if  not  as  a  tyjiographical  error  of  the 
Ed.  princeps  of  Simon  de  Magistris ;  see  Bugati, 
in  Hiivemick  on  this  passage. — He  set  it  up 
(caused  it  to  be  set  up)  in  the  plain  of 
Dura,  in  the  province  of  Babylon.  ^*"■p3) 
like  the  corresponding  Hebrew  term,  does  not  de- 
signate a  narrow  valley  enclosed  by  mountains, 
but  a  low  and  level  tract,  a  plain;  hence  a 
majority  of  modems  read  "in  the  plain  of  Dura." 
The  location  of  this  plain  is  not  entirely  certain  ; 
but  it  was  probably  east  of  the  Tigris  and 
near  Apollonia  in  the  province  of  Sittacene, 
where  a  town  by  the  name  of  Dura  was  situated, 
according  to  Polyb.  v.  52,  and  Ammian,  xxv. 
6,  9.  The  Aovpa  (otherivise  Dor)  near  Caesarea 
Falsest,  on  the  Mediterranean,  mentioned  in 
Polyb.  V. 66,  and  the  town  of  that  name  situated, 
according  to  Polyb.  v.  48  ;  Ammian.  xxiii.  5,  8, 
near  Circesium  at  the  entrance  of  the  Chaboras 
into  the  Euphrates,  which  was  l;oo  far  northward 
to  have  been  included  in  the  province  of  Baby- 
lon,* cannot  possibly  be  intended  here.  ["We 
must,  without  doubt,  much  rather  seek  for  this 
plain  in  the  neighborhood  of  Babylon,  where, 
according  to  the  statement  of  Jul.  Oppert  (Ex- 
pedit.  Scieritifique  en  Mimpoirimie.  I.  238  ff.), 
there  are  at  present  to  be  found  in  the  S.S.E  of 
the  ruins  representing  the  former  capital  a  row 
of  mounds  which  bear  the  name  of  Dura  ;  and 
at  the  end  of  them,  along  -n-ith  two  larger 
mounds,  there  is  a  smaller  one  named  el-Mohattnt 
(=  la  Celine  obliguee),  which  forms  a  square  six 
metres  high,  with  a  basis  of  fourteen  metres, 
wholly  built  of  unbumed  biicks,  and  which  shows 
so  surprising  a  resemblance  to  a  colossal  statue 
with  its  pedestal,  that  Oppert  believes  this  lit- 
tle mound  to  be  the  remains  of  the  golden  image 
erected  by  Nebuchadnezzar. " — 'Eeil.]  The  Sept. 
which  probably  regarded  the  plain  here  referred 
to  as  identical  with  the  plain  of  Shinar.  Gen.  xi. 
2,  and  which  could  find  no  town  bearing  the  name 
of  Dura  within  its  limits,  has  conceived  the  name 
i<"l_'"'1  to  be  an  appellative,  and  rendered  it  by 
hi  TTfriJu  -at'  Trepiiiu'/.m  (cf  -7,-r,,  circiimire,  in 
orbem  ire)  ;  in  which,  however,  they  were  more 
nearly  correct  than  is  Hitzig,  who  assumes  that 
his  pseudo-Daniel  adopted  the  name  of  fheplnin 
from  the  earlier  designation  (chap.  ii.  45)  of  the 
mountain,  s^ir- — Verse  2.  Then  Nebuchadnez- 
■Lax  the  king  sent  to  gather  together,  etc.  This 
ser\-ice  was  probably  performed  by  couriers 
(Ci2^)i  '>^ho  were  doubtless  employed  in  similar 
duties  at  the  Babylonian  court,  as  well  as  at  th« 
Persian  (Esth.  x.  15  ;  viii.  14).  and  even  at  thg 
courts  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xi.  7)  and  of  Hezekiah 
(3  Chron.  xxx.  6,  10). — The  princes,  the  gov- 


•  Cf.  gcneraEy,  Rawlinson,  Journal  o/  the  B.  Geogr.  i 
vtelu,  \„  p.  'J3. 


CHAP.  III.  1-30. 


9c 


emors,  and  the  captains.  Among  the  seven 
classes  of  officials  enumerated,  these  three  are 
shown  to  have  been  more  immediately  related 
to  each  other  by  the  ^  before  !*";ns.  Their 
members  were  executive  officers  of  superior 
rank,  who  combined  both  civil  and  military 
functions  in  their  range  of  duties,  and  who  may 
have  been  substantially  on  a  par  with  the  execu- 
tive officials  connected  w^th  the  ministry  of  the 
interior  in  a  modern  state,  while  the  four  suc- 
ceeding classes  were  probably  connected  with  the 
departments  of  finance  and  justice.  (1)  The 
V?S1~'.;."ns  were  naturally  satraps  (cf.  ksJmtra- 
pt'twuii  on  the  cuneiform  inscriptions  at  Behi- 
tun,  which,  according  to  Haug  [in  Ewald's 
Bibl.  Jithrb.,  V.  153J  is  equivalent  to  "protec- 
tor of  the  country,"  and  according  to  Lassen 
[Zeitschi:  far  Kunde  des  Murgenl.,  VI.  1,  IS]  is 
synonymous  with  "guardian  of  the  warriors  of 
the  host;"  cf.  also  the  Zend  shoithrapaiti  and 
the  Sanscr.  /cshiithrapn) — the  superior  executive 
officers  of  the  several  provinces,  vice  or  sub- 
kings  to  the  sovereign  (cf.  the  Vr  P*?!  Isa.  x.  8 ; 
Gen.  xiv.  1,  2,  with  the  S';?^'?  '^bs,  Dan.  ii. 
37,  Ezra  vii.  12),  and  therefore  mentioned  at 
the  head  of  the  body  of  officials.  The  fact  that 
the  title  of  these  chief  administrators  of  pro- 
vinces is  Persian  does  not  demonstrate  that 
their  office  was  entirelj'  confined  to  the  time  of 
the  Acha^menidian  Persian  empire,  or  that  it 
was  even  created  by  Darius  Hystaspis  (Herod. 
III.  yO  s.s. );  for  Xenophon  {Cyrop.  viii.  6,  1) 
dates  its  existence  back  to  the  time  of  Cyrus, 
and  Berosus  liu  Josephus,  c.  Ajnoit,  1. 19  ;  Ant. 
X.  11.  1)  designates  Xecho  already  as  a  re-nyfiivog 
cnrnd-i/r  of  Xabopolassar,  which  is  hardly  to  be 
considered  a  gi'oss  anachronism,  but  rather  as  an 
indication  of  the  relation  of  Xecho  as  a  vassal  to 
Babylon.  Consequently,  the  author  cannot  be 
charged  with  a  historical  error,  either  in  this 
connection,  or  in  chap.  vi.  2  et  seq. ,  where  he 
refers  to  the  satraps  of  Darius  the  Mede.  The 
•i";r-^-'Jns  must  be  regarded  rather,  as  one  of 
the  Persian  elements  of  the  writer's  Chaldee 
idiom,  the  number  of  which,  according  to  the 
Introd.  ^  1,  note  3,  must  have  been  considerable, 
even  at  an  early  period  (cf.  on  chap  ii.  4);  and 
the  early  intrusion  of  such  into  the  language  and 
range  or  conception  among  the  Chaldasans,  is  no 
more  remarkable  than  is  the  mention  of  the 
3""-"!,  Jer.  xxxix.  3,  as  a  Chalda^an  offi- 
cer. The  Septuagint,  however,  renders  the 
term  by  anv/wTai  only  here  and  in  chap.  vi.  2, 
4,  while  in  vs.  3  and  27  it  has  h~aroi,  in  Ezra 
viii.  36  (hntK/irai^  in  Esth.  viii.  9  ntKm'6iwi^  and  in 
Esth.  ix.  3  riiiuvmi.  These  variations  indicate 
that  the  conception  of  a  definite  office  was  no 
longer  connected  with  the  title,  at  the  time 
when  that  version  was  made. — (2)  According  to 
the  observations  on  chap.  ii.  48,  the  V:^9 
were  "superintendents,  administrators "  gener- 
ally ;  in  this  case  naturally  not  endowed  with 
spiritual  functions,  but  rather  performing  secu- 
lar duties  under  the  satraps,  and  finally  em- 
ployed chiefly  in  military  rather  than  in  civil 
offices  (cf.  the  S^:30  of  Babylon,  mentioned 
together  with  the  Bi-liSJ,  Jer.   Ii.   57).     The 


Septuagint  appears  to  have  conceived  of  these 
Signin,  in  harmony  with  this  view,  as  being 
"  prsefects  of  the  host,  or  commanders  of  the 
provinces;"  for  they  render  the  term  in  this  in- 
stance by  iyrpaT!i)nt  (as  in  v.  3  and  often,  twelve 
times  in  all),  while  they  translate  it  elsewhere 
by  rnrraijxai  (chap,  iii  27),  'lynriiivot  (chap.  ii. 
j  48),  oriiMoiTff.— (3)  S«r^^~5  (Heb.  ninp,  from 
nriB).  In  view  of  the  probably  Indo-Germanio 
derivation  of  this  term  (cf.  Sanscr.  paksha, 
"  side,"  Prakr.  pakkha.  modern  Persian  and 
Turkish  panha)  it  properly  designates  "those 
who  are  stationed  on  the  sides  or  flanks,  adju- 
tants," and  then  governors,  or  the  representa- 
tives of  a  sovereign  in  a  designated  field  of  ad- 
ministration, provincial  pra;fects.  The  gover- 
nors whom  Solomon  placed  over  his  pro\'incea 
outside  of  Palestine,  already  bore  this  title  (1 
Kings  X.  15  ;  2  Chron.  ix.  14),  also  the  governors 
of  the  Syrian  king  Benhadad  (1  Kings  xx.  24) ; 
the  corresponding  officers  among  the  Syrians 
(Isa.  xxxvi.  9  ;  2  Kings  xviii.  24),  Chaldaj-ans 
(Ezek.  xxvi.  6,  23  ;  Jer.  Ii.  23)  and  Persians  (Esth. 
viii.  9 ;  ix.  3 ) ;  and  especially  the  Persian  gover- 
nors of  Judjea  subsequent  to  the  captivity  (Hag. 
i.  1,  14  ;  ii.  2,  21  ;  Neh.  v.  14,  18,  etc.)  Among 
the  nations  last  mentioned,  who  employed 
satraps  as  the  chief  priefects  of  provinces,  the 
nnp  was  merely  a  subordinate  to  those  officers 
(and  more  purely  civil  than  military  in  his  official 
character,  as  appears  from  the  position  of  Zerub- 
babel  and  Nehemiah,  according  to  Haggai  and 
Neh.  1.  c. ) ;  but  in  the  kingdoms  of  Solomon 
and  Benhadad  the  Tinc  seem  to  have  been 
equal  in  rank  to  the  later  satraps,  and  there- 
fore were  chief  governors.  In  this  place  and  v. 
3  the  Septuagint  translates  To-ap  xai ;  in  v.  27, 
aftxi^^n~f>i''>~<u  {i.e.,  chief  of  a  nationality). — (4) 
According  to  the  Sept.  the  '*'|'^!3"^^^<  are  "over- 
seers" generally  (Jn-nm/),  while  most  modems 
regard  them  as  "chief  judges  or  discerners." 
Ewald  defines  them  as  "  chief  star-gazers,  or  au- 
gurs of  the  first-class  "  (!),  and  Hitzig.  as  "direc- 
tors, upon  whom  devolves  the  decision  of  matters, 
or  magistrates."  The  term,  which  occurs  only  in 
this  place,  appears  to  be  a  genuine  Aramaic 
compound,  from  "l~Si  glory,  dignity,  and  "l!3t 
to  decide  (cf.  chap.  ii.  27),  and  therefore  proba- 
bly designates  a  class  of  officers  with  whom 
rested  the  final  decision,  particularly  in  regard 
to  the  economical  or  financial  administration  of 
the  provinces  [possibly  =  the  modem  Oriental 
Tiziers],  The  class  which  follows  next  in  order 
obliges  this  restriction  of  the  offices  of  the 
H'-lTjI-ts. -_  (.5)  X^'ISia,  "the  treasurers." 
These  officers  do  not  probably  differ  from  the 
V"}?!3,  Ezra  vii.  21  (cf.  i.  8),  which  term  signi- 
fies }  aCnoi'/.a/v-ff,  *''•  managers  of  the  public  treas- 
ury "  (cf.  Sept.  ihniKr,Taij,  and  is  possibly  related 
to  the  Pers.  gaitha,  modem  Pers.  genj,  "treas- 
ure "  (cf.  gma).  Ewald's  assertion  that  '^?~3 
is  synonymous  with  "l?!",  vs.  24,  27,  and  sig- 
nifies a  "  bearer  of  power,''  or  "  exalted  prince 
of  the  empire"  (analogous  to  the  old-Pers. 
chudtdr,  from  chad.,   "God,   authorization"),  is 

without  adequate  support. — (G)    The   K^'llCj'' 


94 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


are  clearly  the  "  learned  in  the  law,"  or  the 
"guardians  of  the  law."'  The  first  element  of 
the  word  is  evidently  r~,  "the  law"  (cf.  Pers. 
ddtii.  from  da,  "to  give"),  to  which  the  Pers. 
ending  vdr  is  annexed.  Cf.  the  Pehlvi  word 
(Uitouber  (Armen.  dataior),  "judges." — (7)  The 
immistakable  connection  of  H"~^~  (like  No.  4,  i 
a  hapax  leg.)  with  the  Arab,  ftah  (cf.  the  Tur- 
kish mufti,  chief  judge)  marks  this  class  of 
officers  as  "  dispensers  of  justice,  lawyers,  jud- 
ges" in  the  strict  sense  (not  "prsfecti"  as  the 
Vulgate  has  it.  or  "oi  f-'  i^ovaion;"  as  it  is  ren- 
dered by  Theodotion,  in  each  case  because  of  a 
failure  to  apprehend  the  true  meaning. — And 
all  the  rulers  of  the  provinces;  i.e.,  all  the  re- 
maining officials  who  administrated  the  affairs 
of  provinces.  On  flSpC,  "ruler,  high  offi- 
cial," cf.  Eccles.  viii.  4,  and  also  the  verb 
t:;".L"S.  chap.  ii.  48.  The  prfefect  of  the  body- 
guard, mentioned  in  chap.  ii.  14,  is  not  neces- 
sarily included  among  these  remaining  rulers, 
since  only  the  officers  of  the  provinces  are  more 
immediatel.y  referred  to  in  this  connection 
(against  Kranichfeld).  Von  Lengerke  is  guilty 
of  a  gross  impropriety,  when  he  finds  here  "an- 
other extravagance,  since  the  empire  could  not 
in  the  meantime  be  left  without  an  administra- 
tion." It  is  not  necessary  to  stretch  ;t  so  un- 
reasonably in  this  case,  as  to  make  it  indicate 
the  presence  of  iiU  the  government  officials  with- 
out exception  (cf.  1  Sam.  xxviii.  4,  and  gene- 
rally Kranichfeld  on  the  passage). — To  come  to 
the  dedication  of  the  image,  etc.  "SIH-  the 
fea»t  of  (kdicfition,  religious  dedicatory  ser- 
vices, with  which  were  connected  sacrifices,  the 
burnmg  of  incense,  sacrificial  feasts,  etc.  Cf. 
Ezra  vi.  Hi,  where  the  same  expression  is  em- 
ployed with  reference  to  the  dedication  of  the 
second  temple. 

Verses  3-7.  The  dedication.  And  they  stood 
before  the  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar  had 
(caused  to  be)  set  up.  The  Keri  has  ","■»; "p  in- 
stead of  V^^Tt,  as  it  substitutes  V''!l  for 
"r"H~  in  chap.  ii.  38,  according  to  the  usage  of  the 
Targums. —  '.-~^,  "before,  opposite."  which  is 
employed  here  and  in  Ezra  iv.  10.  instead  of  the 
usual  Chaldee  form  -.-pb  (chap.  v.  1.  4, 10  ;  Ezra 
vi.  13),  is  a  Syriasm  in  the  pronunciation,  similar 


to  that  in 


Gen.  xxxvii.   23.  which  is  used 


instead  of  — '.^/'. — Verse  4.  Then  a  herald  cried 
aloud.  ""~3  and  the  corresponding  verb  '"13 
•'  to  proclaim  publicly"  (v.  29),  are  not  exactly 
Aramaic  adaptations  of  the  Greek  terms  '■'iini, 
KT/pir-eir  iBertholdt  and  othersi,  but  are  without 
doubt  radically  related  to  them,  and  also  to  the 
Sanscr.  kfiis,  old-Pers.  khre>sio.  ""one  who  calls 
or  screams"  (mod.  Pers.  r/ris-t&a;  cf.  the  Ger- 
man kreischen) ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  they 
are  also  related  to  snp  "  to  call."  —  '"T?" 
miyJdily.  with  a  loud  voice,  as  in  chap.  iv.  11  ; 
V.  7,  and  as  in  the  Heb.  v-r,  Psa.  xxix.  4 ; 
Isa.  xl.  i). — To  you  it  is  commanded,  O  people^ 
nations,  and  languages.  "("""Sf,  properly  •■  they 
sav"  («/t  .«".V"ij),  a  very  common  idiom  in  the 


Chaldee,  expressing  an  impersonal  sense,  oi 
more  directly,  serving  as  a  substitute  for  the  im- 
personal passive  construction  (Winer,  §  49,  3). 
The  collocation  of  S"^"?  ("  peoples,  nations"), 
S'^iit  ("  tribes,"  a  more  limited  conception  than 
the  preceding ;  cf.  alsointheHeb.,  e.j.  Psa.  cxi.  C 
with  Gen.  xxv.  16),  ana  *«v"f  ^  ("'tongues,"  "'peo- 
ples having  a  common  language ;"  cf.  the  Heb. 
■|i"i;3  Isa.  Ixvi.  18  ;  Zech.  viii.  23),  recurs  again  in 
vs.  7,  29,  and  31,  and,  indeed,  often  in  the  book  of 
Daniel  (v.  19;  vi.  26;  vii.  14).  This  formula, 
which  combines  in  a  solemn  triad  "  all  the  na- 
tions in  the  empire,  however  distantly  related 
they  may  be,  or  however  great  may  be  the 
diversity  between  themselves  or  their  constit- 
uent elements,"  and  which  exhorts  them  to 
give  attention,  was  probably  stereotyped  in  the 
official  edicts  of  the  ChaldEean  realm,  whose 
motley  aggregate  of  languages  and  nations  would 
give  rise  to  such  comprehensive  phra.-^es  more 
readily  than  would  the  character  of  any  other 
empire  of  antiquit}'.  The  proclamation,  of 
course,  is  not  addressed  to  all  the  individuals  of 
the  various  nations,  tribes,  etc.,  but  only  to  their 
representatives  who  were  actually  present. 
["The  proclamation  of  the  herald  refers  not 
only  to  all  who  were  present,  since  besides  the 
officers  there  certainly  was  present  a  great  crowd 
of  people  from  all  parts  of  the  kingdom,  as  M. 
Geier  has  rightly  remarked,  so  that  the  assem- 
bly consisted  of  persons  of  various  races  and 
languages.  S'SS  denotes  tribes  of  people,  as 
the  Hebr.  riSS,  T'^tH,  Gen.  xxv.  16,  denotes 
the  several  tribes  of  Ishmael,  and  in  Num.  xxv. 
15,  the  separate  tribes  of  Jlidianites  ;  and  ia 
thus  not  so  extensive  in  its  import  as  1"^'??> 
peoples.  S^'Cb,  corresponding  to  ri:~^n,  Isa. 
Ixvi.  18,  designates  (see  Gen.  x.  5,  20,  31)  com- 
munitics  of  men  of  the  mine  l/inyitayt.  and  ia 
not  a  tautology,  since  the  distinctions  of  nation 
ami  of  Language  are  in  the  course  of  history  fre- 
quently found.  The  placing  together  of  the  three 
words  denotes  all  nations,  however  they  may 
have  widely  branched  off  into  tribes  with  differ- 
ent Languages,  and  expresses  the  sense  that  no 
one  in  the  whole  kingdom  should  be  exempted 
from  the  command. " — Kdl.  ]  — Verse  5.  At  what 
time  ye  hear  the  sound  of  the  comet,  flute, 
etc.  As  in  the  case  of  religious  dedicator}-  fes- 
tivals among  the  Israelites  (Psa.  xxx.  1;  Neh. 
xii.  27  ;  1  Mace.  iv.  04),  so  at  the  dedication  of 
this  heathen  statue,  there  was  no  lack  of  music 
and  sonc  (cf.  E,x.  xxxii.  18  et  seq. ).  This  is  an 
especially  natural  feature,  since  the  Babylonians, 
as  well  as  the  ancient  Assyrians,  appear,  as  a 
people,  to  have  been  unusually  addicted  to  music, 
in  view  of  the  testimony  afforded  by  numerous 
historical  records  of  a  positive  character;  cf. 
Isa.  xiv.  11  ;  Psa.  cxxxvii.  2  ;  Herodotus,  I.  191 
(the  X"!"^''"'  ot  the  Babylonians  during  the  cap- 
ture of  their  city  by  Cyrus) ;  Curtius.  V.  3 
(Alexander  welcomed  on  his  entrance  into  Baby- 
lon, by  ■'  artificer  cum  Jidibiix  xni  yeiuris—laiideif 
rajtiin  cntiere  wliti'").  Additional  evidence  in 
found  in  the  representations  of  musicians  with 
various  instniments.  on  the  mcnumentul  edifices 
of  Ntueveh  and  Babylon.— The  names  of  the  siji 


CHAP.  III.  1-30. 


95 


Instruments  here  enumerated  axe  in  the  singu- 
lar, not  as  indicating  that  only  one  of  each  kind 
was  at  hand,  but  as  a  generic  designation  of  the 
entire  class  to  which  it  belonged.  Hence,  there 
is  no  impropriety  in  rendering  them  in  the 
plural  "the  comets,  flutes,"  etc.  ["  SJ"ii5,  horn, 
is  the  tuba  of  the  ancients,  the  l^p  or  lETi"  of 
the  Hebr.;  see  Josh.  vi.  5.  sn^'pinica,  from 
P^'f,  to  hiss  or  whistle,  is  the  reed-flute,  trans- 
lated by  the  Sept.  and  Theodotion  ovpiy^,  the 
fhephercCs  or  Pan's  pipe,  which  consisted  of 
several  reeds  of  different  thickness  and  length 
bound  together,  and  according  to  a  Greek  tradi- 
tion (PoUux,  IV.  9,  15),  was  invented  by  two 
Modes." — Ktil.  "It  is  uncertain  whether  the 
horn  intended  was  straight,  like  the  Assyrian,  or 
cun-ed,  like  the  Roman  cornu  and  lituiis.  The 
pipe  was  probably  the  double  instrument,  played 
at  the  end.  which  was  familiar  to  the  Susianians 
and  .\ssyrians.  The  harp  would  seem  to  have 
resembled  the  later  harp  of  the  Assyrians  ;  but 
it  had  fewer  strings,  if  we  may  judge  from  a  re- 
presentation upon  a  cylinder.  Like  the  As.syr- 
ian,  it  was  carried  under  the  arm,  and  was 
played  with  both  hands,  one  on  either  side  of  the 
strings"  (Rawlinson,  Five  Momirchies,  III.  20).] 
— The  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery,  dulcimer.  For 
the  opinion  that  of  the  names  of  the  four  instru- 
ments here  mentioned,  which  several  e.Kpo.sitors 
hold  to  be  derived  without  exception  from  the 
Greek,  probably  but  two  are  really  taken  from 
that  language,  see  the  Introd.  §  7.  See  ibid, 
note  2.  concerning  the  possibility  of  an  impor- 
tation of  musical  instruments  and  their  names 
from  Greece,  even  prior  to  the  time  of  Daniel. 
It  is  yet  to  be  noticed  in  this  connection:  (1) 
that  instead  of  the  Kethib  Q-iri"^p.  which  is  to 
be  pronounced  either  as  w^r^""!?  or  C1"ip,  the 
Keri  has  the  shortened  form  Ci"P,  which  ap- 
jiears  to  have  been  in  general  use  in  later  times. 
The  Syriac  affords  repeated  examples  of  the  con- 
version of  the  Greek  ending  n:  into  ct  (Gesen. 
T/ies.,  p.  1215).  so  that  in  this  direction  the 
derivation  of  the  term  from  the  Gr.  K'tidim:  seems 
certainly  to  be  secured.  However,  see  the 
lutroJ.,  as  above. — (2)  The  cau^iiKi/,  which 
Strabo  notices  (X.  8,  Ti  as  being  of  foreign 
origin,  and  whose  invention  is  attributed  by 
Clemens  Alex.  (Slrow.  I.  ?(!)  to  the  Troglodytes, 
might  possibly  be  exjilained  in  analogy  with  the 
Sanscrit  ^ambiiku,  "bivalve,  muscle."  The 
form  S*?r?'  however,  appears  rather  to  point  to 
the  Shemitic  root  TiZZ,  "to  weave." — (3)  The 
orthography  of  VlPr^S  is  not  fixed;  in  v.  7 
the  name  is  written  with  ^  instead  of  j-,,  and  in 
vs.  10  and  15  it  is  pointed  with  _  under  p. 
The  numerous  changes  of  the  Greek  ending  wv 
into  y—  which  are  found  in  the  later  Chaldee, 
and  of  which  l'";~~:~  =  nvviSpiov  is  the  most 
familiar  (Gesen.  Thesaur.,  p.  1116),  uidicate 
the  identity  of  this  instrument  with  the 
\ba'/-iiiiiov,  ["It  was  an  instrument  like  a  harp, 
which,  according  to  .Augustine  (on  Psa.  xxxii. 
[xxxiii.]  3  and  Psa.  xlii.  [xliii.]  4)  was  dis- 
tinguished from  the  citJiara  in  this  particular, 


that  while  the  strings  of  the  cithara  passed  ovei 
the  sounding-board,  those  of  the  psalterion  (or 
organon)  were  placed  under  it.  Such  harjis  are 
found  on  Egyptian  (see  Roselini)  and  also  on  As- 
syrian monuments  (cf.  Layard,  yinev.  andBdb., 
plate  XIII.  4)." — Keil.  "In  Egypt  they  have 
an  instrument,  evidently  of  the  same  name,  san- 
tir  (Lane,  Mod  Eg.,  p.  77),  which  is  a  species 
of  dulcimer,  is  stringed,  and  is  beaten  with  two 
small  sticks."— 5<«nr(.]— (4)  V.  10  has  tho 
softer  ~'^:.S~w  instead  of  ~^:"'D'3^0 ;  a  form 
which  points  back  no  less  certainly  than  does 
the  more  usual  term,  to  the  Greek  av/jouvm, 
since  the  sound  v  is  intermediate  between  ^  and 
^—.  Its  rendering  by  "  bagpipe"  (Germ.  Sack- 
pfeife,  Dudelsack)  has  a  sufficient  support  iu 
Polyb.  XXXI.  4,  in  Saadias  on  this  passage,  and 
in  the  Italian  sampogna.  In  addition,  the  name 
avudumt  (Jerome,  "  consonantia  ")  is  exceedingly 
suitable  lor  an  instrument  consisting  of  two 
pipes  which  are  passed  through  a  leathern  bag, 
from  which  their  ends  protrude  equally  above 
and  below — the  lower  of  which  pipes,  when 
played  with  the  fingers  like  a  flute,  emits  in 
screaming  tones  the  sounds  breathed  into  the 
upper  and  increased  in  force  by  passing  through 
the  bag  (cf.  Winer,  R'alw.  II.,  p.  123).  We 
must  therefore  reject  its  interpretation  by  -J^J", 
' '  Pandean  pipes  "  in  the  Heb.  translation  of  the 
pa.ssage  ;  further,  its  rendering  as  "a  drum "  by 
Isidore  (Origg.  III.  21)  ;  the  derivation  of  the 
word  by  Hiivernick  from  n^c>  "  a  reed  ;"  that 
by  Paulus  from  '"';^t^,  "  a  ship,"  "the  cover- 
ing of  a  ship"  (cf.  a  resonant  frame),  etc. 
[Stuart  adduces  the  instrument  called  mim- 
miirah,  described  and  figured  by  Liine  (Mod.  Eg. , 
II.  81,  82),  still  commonly  used  in  Egypt  by  the 
boatmen,  and  giving  two  symphonious  sounds, 
being  double.] — And  all  kinds  of  music.  A 
comprehensive  supplemental  phrase,  similar  to 
that  which  follows  the  names  of  the  oflicers  in 
V.  2.  [By  the  addition  "this  pompous  lan- 
guage of  the  world-ruler  and  of  the  herald  of  his 
power  is  well  expressed." — Keil.}  ^'l'^\  does 
not  desiguate  either  instrumental  music  or 
"  song"  (Hitz. )  as  distinct  from  each  other,  hut 
music  in  general ;  cf.  the  Sept.  and  Theodotion  : 
K  11  ~in-7'i';  jti'iuf  unvaiKLii'.  The  expression  there- 
fore does  not  refer  to  various  melodies,  nor  to 
different  parts  of  vocal  music  ;  but  it  does  not, 
on  the  other  hand,  exclude  such  music  from  the 
ceremony ;  cf.  the  Targ.  Gen.  iv.  21  ;  Ez.  xxxiii. 
22. — Ye  (shall)  fall  down  and  worship  the 
golden  image,  etc.  Kranichteld  obser\'es  cor- 
rectly (on  V.  6) :  "  The  homiige  which  the  king 
required  to  be  rendered  to  his  god  (cf.  on  v.  14) 
on  the  occasion  of  this  great  national  festival  in 
honor  of  their  victories  (cf.  on  v.  1),  was  re- 
g.arded  as  a  test  of  the  loyalty  of  the  officers  to 
the  king  himself,  and  especially  in  the  case  of 
those  who  belonged  to  subjugated  nations.  The 
\-ictory  of  a  heathen  king  over  other  tribes  and 
nations  was  considered  a  triumph  of  his  gods 
over  their  gods  (1  Kings  xx.  23,  28;  2  Chron. 
xxviii.  23  ;  Isa.  xxxvi.  18-20,  etc.);  and  hostile 
kingdoms  included  the  gods  of  their  opponents 
among  their  foes,  and  in  contrast  with  the  usual 
tolerance  and  indifference  of  heathenism  in  re- 
gard to  the  worship  of  the  gods,  they  refuseo 


ae 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


them  rnverence.  so  long  as  neither  party  believed 
that  its  cause  was  lost.  Thus,  for  instance,  the 
different  foes  of  the  Assyrian  empire  are  char- 
acterized on  an  inscription  of  Tiglath-pilesar  as 
those  who  '  refuse  to  reverence '  the  god  of 
Asshur,  as  the  lord  of  Tiglath-pilesar.  Oppod- 
tioii  to  the  gods  of  a  kingdom  was  therefore 
equivalent  to  hostility  against  the  realm.  The 
same  inscription  represents  Tiglath-pilesar,  for 
this  reason,  as  directly  imposing  on  the  con- 
quered nations  the  worship  of  Asshur's  god ; 
they  must  prostrate  themselves  before  this  of- 
fended god,  and  thus  render  their  tribute 
(Fusey,  Daniel,  p.  444  ss.).  This  will  illustrate 
the  baselessness  of  Von  Lengerke's  assertion  that 
religious  compulsion  was  unknown  among  the 
ancient  Asiatic  nations,  and  that  they  never  en- 
forced a  recognition  of  the  gods  from  unwilling 
persons.  What  has  been  remarked,  serves  to 
show  that,  on  the  contrary,  an  expression  of 
homage  toward  the  national  divinity  was  always 
required,  and  even  insisted  on,  whenever  the 
political  supremacy  of  a  realm  wa.s  in  question ; 
and  this  would  be  observed  especially  in  the 
case  of  officers,  upon  whose  loyalty  the  security 
of  the  realm  of  such  divinity  might  depend.  If 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  concerned,  on  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  nation's  triumph  before  us,  to  secure 
a  recognition  of  his  right,  as  the  supreme  ruler, 
to  the  allegiance  of  his  subjects,  and  especially 
to  the  homage  of  the  officials  to  whom  was  en- 
trusted the  administration  of  his  empire,  it  fol- 
lows that  the  compulsory  requirement  to  do 
homage  to  the  national  god  of  his  kingdom,  was, 
in  this  instance,  a  necessary  measure,  aiming 
simply  at  the  preservation  of  the  realm." — Verse 
6,  And-whoso  fallethnot  do\im.  .  .  .  shall  the 
same  hour  be  cast  into  the  midst  of  a  burning 
fiery  fumaoe.  ^TIP,  guicungue,  synonymous 
with  "l""':.  chap.  ii.  28  (cf.  v.  11 ;  chap.  iv.  14). 
—  S<~5|P"ri3,  in  tJie  sameJunir,  literally  "  in  it, 
the  hour ;"  the  suffix,  which  anticipates  the  con- 
nected noun,  is  annexed  to  the  preposition  ;  cf. 
vs.  7,  8,  1  "> ;  iv.  80,  33,  and  also  the  instances  in 
which,  additionally,  the  preposition  is  itself  re- 
peated before  the  noun,  e.g.  S'^b'^ba  RS,  chap. 
V.  30;  cf.  chap.  v.  12.  [''The  frequent  pleo- 
nastic use.  in  the  later  Aramaic,  of  the  union  of 
a  preposition  with  a  suffix  anticipating  the  fol- 
lowing noun,  has  in  the  Bibl.  Chald.  generally  a 
certain  emphasis,  for  the  pronominal  suffix  is 
manifestly  used  demonstratively,  in  the  sense, 
'  even  this.'  " — Keil.]  "5™,  after  the  Arabic,  is 
literally,  "the  quickly  expiring,  the  quickly 
passing,"  hence  ii  moment,  in  which  sense  the 
term  is  often  found  in  the  Targums  (  —  Hebr. 
53  T).  In  Daniel  it  always  has  the  meaning  of 
"  hour,"  as  appears  especially  from  chap.  iv.  16 
[19).  [The  passage  here  referred  to,  however, 
does  not  support  this  later  or  Rabbinical  import 
to  the  word,  which  is  therefore  here,  as  else- 
•K-here  in  Daniel,  to  be  rendered  moment.]  The 
word  docs  not  seem  to  be  related  to  the  verb 
nrUT,  "to  see;"  the  root  from  which  it  is 
derived  signifies  in  the  Arabic  "  celenter  ire, 
eui-rere." — l^PH,  according  to  the  Arabic,  liter- 
ally. ' '  a  furrow,  excavation  "  (whence  probably  : 
0  lime  pit),  designates  an  excavated  smelting 


furnace  in  the  form  of  a  pit,  a  fire  pit,  which 
sense  is  also  expressed  in  the  corresponding 
Ethiop.  TI~S,  and  by  the  originally  synonymous, 
but  not  essentially  related  Heb.  ~l=i:P.  The 
smelting  furnace  here  referred  to,  however, 
being  designed  for  the  infliction  of  the  death 
penalty  on  criminals  by  means  of  fire,  was  ar- 
ranged according  to  vs.  2a  and  26,  so  that  at 
least  one.  if  not  more  of  its  sides,  rose  as  per- 
pendicular (or  inclined)  surfaces  above  the  earth, 
analogous  to  the  construction  of  our  lime-kilns 
and  furnaces,  and  probably  also  to  the  brick- 
kiln (13bn)  at  Tahpanhes  in  Egypt,  which  ia 
referred  to  in  Jer.  xliii.  9  et  seq.  The  principal 
j  opening,  by  which  fuel  and  other  materials  de- 
signed for  burning  (or  smelting)  were  introduced 
into  the  furnace,  was  above  (see  v.  22) ;  a 
second,  for  the  removal  of  slag,  cinders,  etc.,  or 
the  molten  metal,  was  arranged  below,  in  one 
of  the  sides,  and  permitted  persons  standing 
before  the  furnace  to  observe  the  material  in  its 
interior  (the  J'^P,  v.  20 ;  cf .  vs.  24,  25).  The 
passage  Jer.  xxix.  22  ("  The  Lord  make  thee 
like  Zedekiah  and  like  Ahab.  whom  the  king  of 
Babylon  roasted  in  the  fire  " )  attests  that  the 
Babylonians  were  accustomed  to  bum  con- 
demned criminals,  and  perhaps  prisoners  of 
war  in  such  furnaces,  even  prior  to  the  time  of 
Daniel.  The  Moabites  employed  the  same 
method  of  inflicting  capital  punishment,  accord- 
ing to  Am.  ii.  1,  as  did  also  the  Israelites, 
according  to  the  Keri  of  2  Sam.  xii.  31.  ["  That 
burning  was  not  an  unusual  punishment  in  the 
East  is  sufficiently  known.  As  to  the  Persians, 
see  Brissonius.  Jje  li(g.  Pers.,  II.  cap.  216.  .  . 
.  .  .  Chardin  (who  was  in  Persia  A.  D.  1(571-7) 
relates  that  in  a  time  of  scarcity,  two  furnaces 
were  kept  burning  a  whole  mouth,  in  order  to 
consume  such  as  exacted  more  than  the  lawful 
price  of  food  (  Voyages,  VI.  p.  11%)."— Stuart.] 
The  genitive  clause  SF,""^  S"^:,  '•  of  the 
burning  fire,"  exemplifies  the  terribly  cruel  and 
frightful  character  of  the  threatened  punish- 
ment.—Verse  7.  Therefore  at  that  time  when 
all  the  people  heard  the  sound  cf  the  cornet, 
etc.  ["8«:?:T  na  (cf.  also  v.  8)  is  interchanged  with 
8''153,  at  the  time  (verses  5  and  15)  ;  but  it  is 
to  be  distinguished  from  SPI'^.'Tia,  at  the  same 
moment,  verses  6  and  15,  for  ^^^,  or  HSO  has 
in  the  Bib.  Chald.  only  the  meaning  instant, 
moment  (cf.  chap.  iv.  16,  30 ;  v.  5),  and 
acquires  the  signification  short  tiine,  hrmr,  first 
in  the  Targ.  and  Rabbins." — Keil.]  Only  five, 
instead  of  six,  sorts  of  musical  instruments  are 
here  mentioned  ;  but  the  omission  of  the 
SS^rB^^O  can  hardly  be  designed,  as  appears 
from  vs.  10  and  15.  It  is  probably  to  be  attri- 
buted to  the  haste  of  the  writer,  which  also 
caused  the  orthography  of  Tiic:C!:,  with  ^  in- 
stead of  n,  in  this  passage,  and  only  here. 

Verses  8-12.  'I'lie  companions  of  Daniel 
charged  with  transgressing  the  royal  command. 
Wherefore  at  that  tijne  certain  Chaldaeana 
came  near,  ete.  "'Wherefore,"  i.e.,  in  \iew  o£ 
the  worship  rendered  by  all  the  people,  except- 
ing only  the  Jews,  to  the  idol  image.  Daniel 
does  not  mention  that  it  was  refused  by  the 


CHAP.  IIL  1-SO. 


Jews,  leaving  it  to  be  inferred,  as  a  matter  of 
coarse. — And  accused  (or  slandered)  the  Jews 
(cf.  chap.  vi.  25 1 ;  literally,  "  and  ate  the  pieces 
(of  flesh)  of  the  Jews" — a  phrase  found  also  in 
the  Arabic  and  the  Srriac,  which  expresses  both 
the  murder  caused  bj  the  slanderous  tongue, 
and  the  gloating  over  the  fragmentary  remains 
of  the  victim.  Cf.  the  German  ■'Jemnndeii 
kurz  und  kUin  machen,  an  ihm  keiii  (jutm  Hnar 
iassen."  It  appears  from  the  indefinite  "Chal- 
rtajan  men  "  that  the  malicious  informers  were 
not  specifically  Chalda^an  priests  or  wise  men 
(thi.s  would  have  been  indicated  by  T'I'.pS 
merely,  cf.  chap.  ii.  2),  but  people  generally, 
who  were  of  Chaldaian  descent.  ["  That  which 
was  odious  in  their  report  was,  that  they  used 
the  instance  of  disobedience  to  the  king's  com- 
mand on  the  part  of  the  Jewish  officers  as  an 
occasion  of  removing  them  from  their  offices, — 
that  their  denunciation  of  them  arose  from  their 
envying  the  Jews  their  position  of  influence,  as 
in  chap.  vi.  .5  i4).  fE." — Keil.] — Verse  9.  O 
king,  live  lor  ever.  Cf.  chap.  ii.  4. — Verse  12. 
There  are  certain  Jews  wrhom  thou  hast  set 
over  the  affairs  of  the  province  of  Babylon. 
A  clear  reference  to  the  close  of  the  preceding 
section  (chap,  ii  49).  The  mention  of  their  ex- 
alted official  rank  was  designed  to  emphasize  the 
dangerous  feature  connected  with  the  disobedi- 
ence of  such  men  to  the  royal  command,  and  also 
to  direct  attention  to  the  blackness  of  their  in- 
gratitude toward  their  royal  benefactor. — Thess 
men,  O  king,  have  not  regarded  thea;  i.e., 
thy  comra.ands.  '^iS'  "  these,"  is  peculiar  to  the 
Bibliciil  Chaldee  of  Daniel  and  Ezra,  and  is  not 
found  in  the  Targums,  which  have  P^S  or  n^H 
instead  (Winer,  §  !),  p.  29). — They  sarvo  not 
thy  god<,  nor  worship  the  golden  image,  etc. 
The  furnier  of  these  charges  is  related  to  the 
latter  as  the  general  to  the  particular;  the 
gener.al  lack  of  reverence  for  the  gods  of  Babj-- 
lou  on  the  part  of  the  three  men,  which  had  been 
formerly  observed,  was  now  demonstrated  by  a 
flagrant  example.  Because  of  this  evident  re- 
lation to  e.ich  other  between  the  two  clauses — 
a  relation  that  is  again  brought  out  in  the  par- 
allel ver  e  18  (and  possibly  in  verse  14  ;  see  on 
the  passage;^ — the  Kethib  Tj'.TjStl^i  "thy  gods." 
mu.st  be  preferred  to  the  Keri  ■;]";»",  "thy 
god ;  ■'  which  has  been  the  case  accordingly, 
in  Theodotiou  and  the  Vulgate  Compare,  al- 
though-it  is  superfluous,  verse  28  i,  where  ~i^'? 
~^;.H  shows  clearly  that  a  number  of  gods  were 

in  question.  ["  The  Chaldeans  knew  the  three 
Jews,  who  were  so  placed  as  to  be  well  known, 
and  at  the  same  time  envied,  before  this.  They 
hail  long  known  that  they  did  not  worship  idols  ; 
but  on  this  occasion,  when  their  religion  made 
It  necessary  for  the  Jews  to  disobey  the  king's 
command,  they  made  use  of  their  knowledge." 
— Ilitzlij.  It  is  barely  possible  that  the  pro- 
posal of  erecting  such  an  idolatrous  image  and 
requiring  the  whole  realiu.  and  especially  the 
punlic  officials  to  adora  it,  originated,  as  in 
chap.  vi.  with  some  such  malicious  and  envious 
enemies  of  Judaism.) — Why  was  not  Daniel  in- 
cluded in  this  charge  of  the  Chaldajans '?  To  this 
question  that  so  readily  presents  itself,   no  an- 


swer can  be  given  that  will  be  sufficiently  as- 
sured to  exclude  aU  others ;  but  we  are  not  on 
that  account  compelled  (with  v.  Lengerke)  tc 
find  here  a  new  improbability,  and  a  testimony 
against  the  credibility  of  the  book.  Daniel 
might  be  omitted  from  the  number  of  the  ac- 
cused, (1)  because  he  was  too  firmly  established 
in  the  favor  of  the  king,  to  justify  the  attempt 
of  a  slanderer  to  destroy  him  (Calvin,  Hiivemick, 
etc.);  (2)  because  he  was  absent  on  business,  or 
sick  (Liiderwald,  Jahn);  (3)  because  his  position, 
as  chief  of  the  magian  caste,  would  remove  him 
from  the  gaze  of  the  multitude,  and  would  alsc 
relieve  him  from  the  obligation  of  prostrating 
himself  before  the  idol,  which  more  immediately 
affected  the  secular  officials  (see  on  verse  2, 
Kranichfeld).  All  of  these  explanations  are  ad- 
missible ;  and  very  possibly  any  two  of  the 
reasons  adduced  might  combine  to  cause  hia 
absence,  e.  g.  Nos.  1  and  2,  or  2  and  8.  The 
opinion  of  Hengstenberg  however  (with  whom 
Hitzig  agrees),  that  according  to  chap.  ii.  49, 
Daniel  filled  no  office  of  superior  power  and  in- 
fluence in  the  state,  but  that  he  at  once  trans 
f  erred  to  his  three  friends  the  dignity  of  a  viceroy 
which  was  offered  to  him.  and  contented  him- 
self with  the  spiritual  rank  of  chief  of  the  iilagi. 
cannot  be  entertained.  See  to  the  contrary 
chap.  ii.  48,  49,  where  it  was  shown  that, 
together  with  this  spiritual  dignity,  Daniel  must 
have  possessed  considerable  influence  in  the 
political  field,  although  not  bearing  the  title  of 
a  recognized  officer  of  the  state.  ["But  the 
circumstance  that  Daniel,  if  he  were  present,  did 
not  exert  himself  in  behalf  of  his  three  friends, 
may  be  explained  from  the  quick  execution  of 
Babylonian  justice ;  provided  some  higher  reason 
did  not  determine  him  confidently  to  commit 
the  decision  of  the  matter  to  the  Lord  his  God." 
—KcU.] 

Verses  13-15.  The  accused  summ'med  to  re- 
nounce Jehotnh.  Then  Nebuchadnezzar  in 
rage  and  fury  commanded  to  bring,  etc. 
'*?r'l  '?")?•  The  use  of  the  synonymous  terms 
expre.sses  the  violence  of  the  king's  rage.  The 
Inf.  Aphel  "'i'^^'^'''  "to  let  them  be  brought,"  is 
found  also  in  chap.  v.  2. 13. — Then  they  brought 
these  men  belore  the  king;  rather,  "  Then 
these  men  were  brought  before  the  king." 
^"-^"'■■^  is  not  to  be  taken  transitively.  "  they 
brought  these  men"  (Chr.  B.  Michaelis.  etc.)  ; 
ni^r  is  it  to  be  explained  as  a  Hebraizing  Hophal 
form  (Buxt. .  Haveruick,  v.  Lengerke).  It  is 
rather  a  passive  form  of  the  Aphel  after  the 
manner  of  the  Hebrew  [Hophal],  of  which  the 
3d  pers.  masc.  sing,  is  ''^''D'  the  fem.  CT;r"'n 
(chap.  vi.  18),  while  the  regular  participle  with 
a  passive  signffioation  would  be  """''5'  and  the 
active  partic.  Aphel  ^""'^  (cf.  Hitzig  and  Kra- 
nichfeld on  this  passage). — Verse  14.  Of  pur- 
pose (marg.),  O  Shadrach  ....  do  ye  not 
serve    my    god?       The    plural    ^.~;s;i     "my 

gods,"  is  perhaps  admissible  here,  in  analogy 
with  verses  12  and  18  (Hitzig)  :  but  in  this  in- 
stance the  singular  is  especially  suitable,  as  re- 
ferring directly  to  the  image  of  the  idol  im- 
mediately before  them  ;  and  there  is  no  Keri,  in 
this   case,   recommending  the  plural. —  Sf^^ri, 


n^ 


THE  PEOPHET  DANIEL. 


literally,   "Was  it  design?" — a  combination  of 
the  interrogative  H  with  ttlS,  a  noun  that  oc- 
curs in  no  other  jilace,  but  which  may  be  ex- 
plained  by  '-fraudulent  design,    evil  purpose" 
[contumacy]  on  the  analogy  of  the  Hebrew  n'^-IS 
(Num.  XXXV.  SO,  21).     The  question,  '-Does'an 
evil    purpose   lead  you  to   refuse  to  serve   my 
god"?  evidently  has  a  substantial  basis  in  the 
Bituation  as  described  ;  for  these  men  had  by  no 
means   presented    themselves    at    once  in    the 
festive  assembly,  as  is  shown  by  the  command 
to  "  bring  them."    Despite  their  official  station, 
they  had  rather  endeavored  to  avoid  any  parti- 
cipation  in   the   ceremonies.        Nothing    could 
therefore   be   more  natural  than   the    question 
of  the   king,  as  to   whether   their  absence  was 
grounded  on  an  actual  disobedience  or  evil  de- 
sign, or  not.     The  usual  interpretation  of  »"l"j:n 
is  therefore  to  be  retained,  and  the  departures 
from  it  must  be  rejected  ;  e.  (/.,  the  rendering  of 
Ht'veniick  ("  Is  it  because  ye  mock,  or  despise 
my   gods,    that    ye   do    not   worship   them?"), 
and  by   Fiirst   and    Kranichfeld  (who   conceive 
Sir.-  as  an  adverbi.al  Aphel  noun,  from  SIS,  and 
thus  avoid  the  interrogative  sense  of  the  clause 
entirely :   "In  mockery  ye  not  serve  my  god  !  "). 
[The  interpretation  of  the  Engl.  Bible.    "  Is  it 
true,"  is  not  only  unsustained  by  the   etymo- 
logical signification  of  the  word,  but  at  variance 
with  the  circumstances  of  the  case ;  for  their 
absence  %yas  a  matter  of  fact,  and  their  declining 
to  worship  was  only  a  question  of  inadvertence 
or  setted  determination.    ' '  The  king,  .seemingly 
with  more  than  usual  moderation,  first  inquires 
into  the  truth  of  the  accusation."     (Rather  he 
first  opens  the  way  for  the  most  favorable  con- 
struction  of    the    omis.sion. )       ••  He    probably 
suspected  the  accusers  of  envious  motives,  and 
was  desirous  of  sparing  these  Hebrews  on  whom 
he    had    bestowed    special     favors." — Studrt.] 
—Verse   15.       Now  if   ye    be    ready  that    at 
what  time   ....    ye   worship;    i.e.    "at   the 
time  ...   to  worship.     This  conditional  clause 
of  a  positive  character  may  be  re.adily  completed 
from  the  negative  conditional  clause  which  im- 
mediately follows,   whose  apodosis  involves  the 
contrary-  of  the  thought  here  required  ;  hence, 
e.g..   ■■nothing  shall  be  done  to  you;  ye  shall 
escape  the  death  by  fire."  The  same  construction 
[aposiopesis]  occurs  in  Ex.  xxxii.  ;J3  ;  Luke  xiii 
9.     It   is   also    frequent   in    the   classics,  e.  g., 
Homer,  11.  I.  ia,5  ;  Plato,  I'roiag.   1,5 ;   and  like- 
■wise  m  the  Araijic—  "1'3    at  the  beginning  of 


the  sentence,  corresponds  to  the  Heb.  "FJ'''. ; 
the  Vulgate  rendersit  correctly  by  "i\'«HC  ergo." 
—And  who  is  that  God  that  shall  deliver 
you  out  of  my  hand  ?  Not  exactly  a  direct  blas- 
phemy of  the  God  of  the  Jew  (Hitzigi,  but 
still  a  challenge  .iddressed  to  Him  in  a  presump- 
tuous spirit  and  -with  a  haughty  sense  of  superior 
power;  cf.  Isa.  xxx-vii.  10;  and  supra,  on 
verse  1. 

Verses  16-18.  Tlie  simdfant  confession  of  the 
threi  Jew.i.  Shadrach  ....  answered  and 
faid  to  the  king,  O  Nebuchadnezzar,  etc. 
Thus  the  Masoretic  punctuation,  l^•hich,  how- 
i  ver,  is  departed  from  by  all  the  ancient  trans- 
lations. The  Septuagint  introduces  a  ikiaO.cv, 
"0  king,"  before  the  vocative  Nebuchadnezzar, 


and  Theodotion  and  the  Vulgate  connect  the 
name  of  the   king  mth   the   preceding  dative 
case,  and   therefore  place  the  Athnach   under 
2=13:.     But  there  is  no  ground  for   either  of 
these  variations :   for  while  on  the  one  hand, 
the  boldness  of  the  reply  is  indicated  at  the  be' 
ginning  by  the  word  S3^J:ib,  the  direct  addresa 
by  name,  on  the  other  hand,  conveys  an  em- 
phasis and  solemnity  that  fuUy  comport  -with 
the  situation.      The  vocative  ^t3bS   in  v.    17 
shows  that  the  form  of  this  address,  which  con- 
tains merely  the  name  of  the  king,  and  omita 
the   royal  title,    was   not    designed   as    an   ex- 
pression  of  contempt.     Cf.  v.  14,  where  Nebu- 
chadnezzar likewise  addresses  the  three  Hebrews 
simply  by  name.  — We  are  not  careful  to  answer 
thee  in  this  matter,  i.  e. ,  it  is  not  ntcessary.    The 
primary  emphasis  falls  on  ''jnrs,   as  appears 
from  the  words  ^^^r^is  ''^''^H  ""n  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  next  verse.     Hence  the  sense  is, 
"It  is  not  we  that  are  compelled  to  answer  thee 
{i.e.,  to  manage  our  case  before  thee),  but  if 
our  God  can  deliver  us,"  etc.     On  ^"'nrn  cf. 
chap.  iv.  16;  v.  25.     The  root  nsn  is  foreign 
to  the  language  of  the  Targums.  but  is  found  in 
the    Syriac,    where   it  signifies   "to  be  useful, 
suitable,"  while  in  the  Bibl.  Chaldee  it  expresses 
the  idea  of  being  necessary  (e.g.,  Ezra  vi.  9  ;  cf. 
rman^  "  need,"  Ezra  vii.  20),  or  of  standing  in 
need   of   (as  in  this  place). — T\'rr\'S,    "  upon 
this,"  is  connected  with  the  following  Dj-r,  by 
the  Sept.,  Theodotion,  Vulgate,  Havernick,"etc. : 
"to  answer  thee  upon  this  word  (or  matter)  ;" 
but  in  that  case  ajr.c  must  be  in  the  stat.  em- 
pluiticus,  despite  the  preceding  demon.strative  ; 
cf.  chap.  iv.  10  ;  ii.  32  ;  Ezra  vi  11.— 03-E  is  a 
word  unquestionably  borrowed  from  the  Persian 
(cf.  the  Introd.  g  1,  note  3),  but  found  also  in 
the  later  Hebrew  of  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes 
(see  on  Ecc.  viii.  11).     It  is  compounded  from 
the  Zend  preposition  pniti  (  =  pi-ati,  -pd(;)  and 
the  verb  gam.  "  to  go,"  and  accordingly,  signi- 
fies  "what  is  going  forward,  a  message"  (cf. 
mod.    Pers.  paiam,    "a  messenger,"   and  the 
Armen.   patgam.    "a  message"),    from   which 
results  the  further  meaning  of  "  a  command, 
edict,   word."     The  latter  is  the  sense  in  this 
place.     The  idea  of  "answer"  results  from  its 
connection  -with  the  verb  3^r.rt,  "  to  give  back." 
— Verse   17.    If  it  be  so,  our  God  whom  we 
serve  is  able  to  d.eliver  us ;  rather,  "  If  our  God 
whom  we  serve,  can  save  us."     in  is  not  the 
Heb.  >"i  or  n3n,  and  cannot  be  rendered  by  ecee 
enim,   -with  the  Vulgate,   nor  by  a  causal  ;op, 
with  the  Sept.     It  corresponds  rather,  as  always 
in  Daniel,  to  the  Heb.   CS,  "if,"  and  is  here,  aa 
in  V.  15,  in  contrast  with  a  Hb  "in  (see  v.  17). 
In  this  case,  however,  the  conditional  clause  is 
followed  by  its  apodosis.  which  begins,  as  the 
atlinach   correctly   indicates,    with    the    words 
■(=lPH"Tp.     ,3^,  "  to  be  able,"  does  not,  of  course, 
refer  to  the  ability  of  God,  as  limited  by  .any 
bounds  whatever,   but  as  ethically  conditioned 
(cf.  Gen.  xix.  29).      Tho  pious  Jews  were  no* 


CHAP.  III.  1-3U. 


99 


p~obably  concerned  to  maintain  the  perfection 
of  the  Divine  power  in  opposition  to  the  king, 
but  at  the  most,  their  own  worthiness  to  find 
mercy  at  the  hands  of  the  Almighty  (cf.  chap, 
ii.  18;  Ti.  22;  is.  15-19),— and  perhaps  not 
even  this, — for  the  whole  may  have  been  spoken 
from  the  point  of  \new  occupied  by  the  heathen 
hearers  of  the  three  Hebrews,  who  certainly 
doubted  Jehovah's  ability  to  save  His  servants. 
In  order  to  refer  these  opponents,  and  above  all 
the  king  himself,  with  all  possible  emphasis  to 
the  test  of  experience,  upon  which  everything 
depended,  the  Jews  employ  the  words,  "  If  our 
God — can  save"  (thus  corresponding  to  v.  IT), 
although  it  would  have  been  more  in  harmony 
with  their  Israelitish  consciousness  to  say,  "  If  He 
iciU  save  "  (cf.  Hitzig  on  this  passage).  ["  There 
lies  in  the  answer,  '  If  our  God  will  save  us, 
then  ....  and  if  not,  know,  O  king,  that  we 
will  not  serve  thy  gods,'  neither  audacity,  nor  a 
superstitious  expectation  of  some  miracle,  (ver. 
17),  nor  fanaticism  (ver.  18),  as  Berth.,  v.  Leng., 
and  Hitz.  maintain,  but  only  the  confidence  of 
faith  and  a  humble  submission  to  the  will  of 
God." — Keil.  In  the  most  extreme  event  they 
prefer  death  to  idolatry.] 

Verses  19-23.  The  extmition.  Then  .... 
and  the  form  (the  expression)  of  his  visage  'was 
changed  against  Shadrach,  etc.  The  A.  V.  is 
literal.  The  Kethib  ^?r'.L"S  is  conformed  to  the 
Genit.  "'niBIS;,  while  the  Keri  ■':PrH  agrees 
with  the  Nom.  sing.  2;^-  The  former  con- 
struction, as  being  more  rare  and  difficult,  is  to 
be  considered  genuine. — Seven  times  more 
than  it  was  wont  to  be  heated ;  thus  Ber- 
tholdt,  Gesenius,  and  other's,  in  agreement  with 
the  A.  V.  But  "^yn,  passive  part,  of  riTn>  "to 
see."  is  constantly  used  in  the  Targums  in  the 
sense  of  "suitable,  appropriate"  (literally, 
'•  what  has  been  selected  as  appropriate,"  j««(i 
conteniens  vinim  est),  and  the  construction  with 
i,  c.  Infinit.,  shows  that  the  same  signification 
is  required  here.  Therefore,  "seven  times 
beyond  its  appropriate  heating;"  i.e.,  seven 
times  more  than  was  necessary  {-ap  b  hhi.  Sept). 
[The  sense  thus  yielded,  however,  is  more  inept 
than  the  other,  and  the  impersonal  construction 
of  the  former  verb  (.-itp),  together  with  the 
active  form  of  the  latter  (n"T?::).  rather  favors 
the  same  rendering.  In  either  case  the  ultimate 
thought  is  the  unusuriUy  intense  fire.] — The 
command  to  heat  the  furnace  exactly  Keeen  times 
beyond  its  proper  measure,  has  a  parallel  in 
judicial  procedures  and  limitations,  where  seven 
as  a  number  indicates  a  full  atonement  or  satis- 
faction, cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  18-24  ;  Deut.  xx.xviii.  7 
et  seq.  ;  Prov.  vi.  31  ;  Matt,  xviii.  21  et  seq. ; 
and  perhaps  passages  like  Isa.  xi.  15  ;  xxx.  2(i  ; 
Psa.  xii.  7,  etc.  This  judicial  bearing  of  the 
number  seven,  which  was  familiar  to  all  the 
ancient  Oriental  nations  and  current  among 
them,  is  the  only  respect  in  which  the  number 
is  here  employed,  and  it  affords  the  only  expla- 
nation of  the  phrase  as  used  by  the  Babylonian 
king,  Ivranichf eld's  remark  is  less  appropriate, 
when  he  observes  that  the  number  seven  ser^'es 
ill  this  instance  to  express  the  idea  of  intensity, 
because  here,  "  where  a  notorious  injury  had 
been  inflicted  on  the  national  divinity,"  no  other 


than  a  pre-eminently  sacred  number  would  be 
adequate  ;  but  this  may  be  admitted  rather  than 
the  general  opinion  that  in  this  case  seven  was 
"  merely  the  indefinite  expression  of  a  round 
number"  (Hiivemick,  etc.) — Verse  20.  And  he 
commauded  the  most  mighty  men  ...  in  his 
army.  n"nr  must  not  be  limited  to  the  life 
or  body  guards,  against  which  view  the  com- 
prehensive and  indefinite  signification  of  the 
term  ';  -n  is,  in  itself,  a  suSicient  testimony ; 
but  in  addition,  the  selection  of  executioners 
from  the  army  is  seen  to  be  well  grounded  and 
capable  of  an  easy  explanation,  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  the  task  was  not  without  danger,  and 
would  require  the  services  of  especially  trust- 
worthy men ;  and  the  presence  of  the  troops  at 
a  religious  ceremony  is  not  strange,  since  a  great 
festive  procession  was  one  of  its  features. — To 
hind  Shadrach  ....  and  to  (rather  ' '  in  order 
to  ")  cast  them  into  the  burning  fiery  furnace. 
The  second  inf.  S~"i":;  is  subordinated  to  the 
first,  arssp,  as  more  directly  pointing  out  the 
special  design. — Verse  31.  Then  these  men  were 
bound  in  their  coats,  their  hosen,  etc  ;  rather, 
their  undergarments,  coats,  etc.  The  haste,  as 
here  implied,  with  which  the  sentence  was  exe- 
cuted, is  in  strong  contrast  with  the  direction 
i  given  immediately  before,  to  heat  the  furnace 
1  more  intensely  than  usual ;  for  the  newly  added 
!  fuel  would  require  time  before  it  could  bum 
!  with  sufficient  force,  in  a  furnace  of  consider- 
i  able  size.  But  the  rage  of  an  inflamed  Oriental 
despot  allows  itself  no  time  in  which  to  quietly 
consider  aU  the  circumstances  connected  with 
any  given  case. — Three  articles  of  clothing  are 
specified  as  belonging  to  the  costume  of  the 
three  Hebrews,  which  may  have  constituted  the 
distinguishing  features  of  their  official  dress ; 
and  upon  these  follows  the  generalizing 
T'~"'"r'--?^,  "'and  their  (other)  garments"  (cf. 
vs.  2  and  5)  [as  "  coverings  for  the  feet  and  the 
head"  (Keil)].  There  would  be  no  need  to 
mention  such  a  variety  of  garments  in  the  case 
of  men  of  inferior  rank. — (1)  The  1";3"0  were 
probably  long  and  closely-fitting  under-gar- 
ments,  that  covered  the  whole  body  (xhirts, 
tunicK) ;  for  the  word  is  most  readily  explained 
by  comparison  with  the  Chald.  quadril.  verb 
\  '?"!?!  texit,  ope7-uit.  It  occurs  in  the  Syriac 
and  the  Talmuds,  with  the  signification  of 
:  pattium  (hence  "mantles" — Luther,  Ge.senius, 
and  many  others) ;  and  in  the  Arabic,  where  it 
becomes  serl/al,  it  designates  a  long  under-gar- 
ment  for  females,  iiidiisit/in  mtiUerts.  Others, 
among  modems,  especially  Hiivemick,  v.  Len- 
gerke,  and  Hitzig,  identify  3310  with  the  Pers. 
shahcar,  Chald.  i'^lr,  and  therefore  translate 
it  by  "hosen,"  justifying  this  opinion  by  an  ap- 
peal to  Symmachus,  the  Vulgate,  and  also  to 
Hesychius,  Suidas,  etc.  (who  explain  the  later 
Greek  fjapdiJapa  hy  ra  rrepi  T(i(;  iivi/iui^a(;  f^(Ju.^CTa, 
lipaKia,  nKt'/rai).  But  the  Pers.  shalwdr  appears 
to  differ  fundamentally  from  our  word,  and  to 
be  related  to  ffi'it.  "the  hip"  (Sanscr.  khnra, 
Latin  cnis),  while  it  bears  no  relation  to  th« 
Zend  ndrai-dro.  "covering  for  the  head"  (from 
siira,   "head,"  and  i-ri,   "to  cover")  in  eithei 


100 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Bound  or  sig-nification.  The  Greek  napaffapa 
ijlid.  Age  sarabnUn).  in  the  sense  of  "hosen," 
aeems,  on  the  other  hand,  to  owe  this  interpre- 
tation to  the  Arabic  .wjvnrii  •'  a  covering  lor  the 
thighs,  '  and  also  to  the  Pers.  nlmlvdr  ;  but  this 
sense  was  not  attributed  to  it  by  the  earliest 
Greek  translators.  Theodotiou,  indeed,  renders 
V^?"!?  hy  (japa.inpii^  but  reserves  the  interpre- 
tation by  ' '  hosen "  for  the  third  garment, 
"):?~2,  which  he  translates  ircpiKvj/^j'Kk^-  while 
the  Sept.  (and  Aquila)  evidently  failed  to  com- 
prehend the  meaning  of  ",i;~^o,  since  it  ren- 
ders it  in  this  place  by  t'-oJijuarn,  but  adopts 
crapa:inpa  in  v.  27.  Upon  the  whole,  the  first 
named  garment  in  this  passage  is  probably 
identical  with  the  K(C)ijy  -rrmhp'eKi/c  /.iveo(,  which 
Herodotus  (I.  195)  describes  as  the  innermost 
garment  worn  by  the  Babylonians. — (3)  The 
■^T-Ti'S,  or,  as  the  Keri  prefers,  V'PP?.  were 
■  not  "  hammers."  of  course,  although  the  root 
~-r,  "to  spread,  extend"  (cf.  ::™p,  "  to  spread 
out"),  is  probably  the  same  from  which  "lU^tSBi 
"  a  hammer,"  is  derived  ;  cf.  the  Gr.  Trarducru, 
"to  strike."  According  to  the  Hebrew  trans- 
lator of  the  Chaldee  sections  of  Daniel,  TIJ^CB 
in  this  place  con'esponds  to  the  Heb.  f^?ri3,  and 
therefore  designates  a  wider  and  more  flowing 
under-garment  than  the  iS^S,  which  answers 
to  the  second,  woolen  tunic  (c'tpiveof  ftdJtJr), 
which  the  Babylonians  wore,  cf.  Herod.  1.  c. 
The  derivation  from  the  Arabic  fuels,  "  a  spider, 
fine  web,"  according  to  which  the  word  would 
rather  designate  the  innermost,  closest,  and 
finest  garmant  (Hitzig),  seems  too  precarious, 
because  of  the  harsh  ?-sound.  The  identifica- 
tion of  the  word  with  the  Gr.  -fVncrof,  "  a  hat, 
covering  for  the  head"  (Bertholdt),  is  entirely 
too  far-fetched,  since  -ivaaoij  was  used  by  the 
Greeks  exclusively  to  designate  the  head-cover- 
ing of  the  ioi/8'i',  and  since  the  Chaldee  lan- 
guage was  certainly  able  to  command  other  than 
Greek  terms  with  which  to  designate  the  Orien- 
tal turban  (e.j.,  in  Ezek.  xxiiL  15  we  find 
C^""3I?).  The  same  reference  of  e'-'wS  back 
to  — /r«(7or  seems  to  underlie  the  rinpatr,  by 
which  the  Sept.,  Theodotion,  and  Theodoret 
render  the  word  in  this  passage.  — (8)  The 
K^?"?  appears  to  have  been  the  third  Babylo- 
nian garment  mentioned  by  Herodotus,  the 
X'/ai'ldiuv  '/^vKtiv,  which  was  worn  over  the  two 
KiSCive^  ;  for  this  word  is  based  on  the  quadril. 
verb  -5"13,  ''  to  gird,  wind  about,"  which  is 
also  found  in  the  later  Hebrew,  cf .  1  Chron.  xv. 
27.  ri2  b''?^?  i^l?"?.  [According  to  Raw- 
linson  (Five  Monarchies,  iii.  3  sq. ),  the  ordinary 
Babylonian  dress  of  the  lower  orders  of  men, 
was  "but  one  garment,  a  tunic,  generally  orna- 
mented with  .a  diagonal  fringe,  and  reaching 
from  the  shoulder  to  a  little  above  the  knee.  It 
was  confined  round  the  waist  by  a  belt. "  The 
head  and  feet  were  bare.  The  richer  persons 
are  represented  on  the  cylinders  as  having  "a 
fillet  or  head-band,  not  a  turban,  round  the 
head.  They  wear  generally  the  same  sort  of  a 
tunic  as  the  others,  but  over  it  they  have  a  long 
robe,  shaped  like  a  modem  dressing-gown,  ex- 


cept that  it  has  no  sleeves,  and  does  not  covei 
the  right  shoulder.  In  a  few  cases  only,  we  see 
underneath  this  open  gown  a  long  under-dress 
or  robe,  such  as  that  described  by  Herodotus.'' 
'•  In  lieu  of  the  long  robe  reaching  to  the  feet, 
which  seems  to  have  been  the  ordinary  costume 
of  the  higher  classes,  we  observe  sometimes  a 
shorter  but  still  a  similar  garment — a  sort  of 
coat  without  sleeves,  fringed  down  both  sides, 
and  reaching  a  little  below  the  knee."  "  With 
rare  exceptions  the  Babylonians  are  represente  J 
■with  bare  feet  on  the  monuments."  "  The 
girdle  was  an  essential  feature  of  Babylonian 
costumes,  common  to  high  and  low."  "The 
dress  of  the  priests  was  a  long  robe  or  gown, 
flounced  and  striped,  over  which  they  seem  to 
have  worn  an  open  jacket  <>f  a  similar  character. 
A  long  scarf  or  ribbon  depended  from  behind 
down  their  backs.  They  carried  on  their 
heads  an  elaborate  crown  or  mitre  "  (ib.).] — The 
garments  which  are  specially  mentioned,  are 
accordingly  referred  to  in  the  order  of  their  suc- 
cession from  within  outward,  "  under-garments, 
coats,  mantles" — a  climax  which  serves  to  indi- 
cate that  because  of  the  excessive  haste  undei 
which  this  transaction  took  place,  the  victims 
were  not  relieved  of  their  under,  nor  even  of 
their  outer  garments.  [Or,  as  Keil  suggests, 
"  in  the  easily  inflammable  nature  of  these  ma- 
terials, namely,  of  the  fine  long  linen  gown  (cf. 
Herod. ),  we  have  perhaps  to  seek  the  reason  on 
account  of  which  the  accused  were  bound  in  their 
clothes."] — Verses  33,  33.  Because  the  king's 
command  was  urgent,  or  furious.  ' '  Because ' 
(n:~  ;:p  iS)  refers  to  what  has  preceded,  and 
the  clause  '"31  "'I'p  (  =  Heb.  Tf't^?,  "there- 
fore ")  points  out  this  reference  more  fully ; 
"because"  is  therefore  equivalent  to  "namely 
because,"  and  the  "]  before  St^lPH  expresses 
the  consequence  :  "  and  because  in  consequence 
the  furnace  was  in  the  mean  time  exceedingly 
heated  up."  With  regard  to  HC^nQ,  "strict, 
raging"  (not  "hurried")  see  on  chap.  ii.  15. — 
The  flame  of  the  fire  slevr  those  men  that 
took  up,  etc.  It  is  not  stated  how  and  at  what 
portion  of  the  furnace  the  death  of  these  execu- 
tioners took  place,  nor  could  it  be  demonstrated 
with  any  degree  of  probability  ;  but  it  is  not 
difficult  to  aB.sume  that,  owing  to  the  excessive 
violence  of  the  fire,  a  strong  draught  of  air, 
while  sweeping  through  the  compressed  flames, 
might  blow  them  in  the  direction  of  the  execu- 
tioners on  their  issuing  from  the  upper  opening 
of  the  furnace,  while  leaving  the  three  victims 
unharmed  at  the  bottom  of  the  furnace,  and 
continuing  to  burn  above  their  heads  without 
attacking  them.  The  deliverance  of  the  con- 
demned Hebrews  is  still  viiraculoiis,  even  on  this 
assumption,  and  the  contrast  between  the  ex- 
traordinary strictness  of  the  means  employed, 
and  the  security  of  the  followers  of  Jehovah  in 
the  face  of  the  rage  of  men,  which  is  so  strongly 
emphasized  by  our  book  (and  also  by  the  "  Song 
of  the  three  children,"  vs.  46-50),  is  .stUl  a  not- 
able fact  Cf.  the  Dog. -ethical  remarks,  No 
3.  [''If  the  three  were  brought  up  to  the  fur- 
nace, it  must  have  had  a  mouth  above,  through 
which  the  victims  could  be  cast  into  it.  When 
heated  to  an  ordinaiy  degree,  this  could  be  done 
without  danger  to  the  men  who  performed  thif 


CHAP.  in.  1-30. 


JO] 


geryice  ;  but  in  the  present  case  the  heat  of  the  I 
fire  was  so  great  that  the  servants  themselves 
perished  by  it.     This  circumstance  also  is  men- 
tioned to  show  the  greatness  of  the  miracle  by  ; 
which  the  three  were  preserved  unhurt  in  the 
midst  of  the   furnace.     The  same  thing  is  in- 
tended by  the  repetition  of  the  word  T'f'S;':i 
bound,   ver.    23,  which,  moreover,  is  purposely  : 
placed  at  the  close   of  the  passage  to  prepare  i 
for  the  contrast  VI'^P,  at  liberty,  free  from  the  ' 


bonds,  ver.    2.5." — Ke.il.\ — The   Sept.,   and  also 


Theodotiou  and  the  Vulg.,  influenced  probably 
by  an  already  existing  Hebrew  or  Greek  tradi-  j 
tion  (see  Introd.  §  11),  introduce  after  v.  23  the  j 
apocryphal  fragment,  "The  prayer  of  Azariah  | 
and    Song   of    the    three   children "    {-/maf  I'V'/  j 
ACapiov  fcai  vftvoi^  ruv  rpti^r),  which  is  broken  by 
a  shorter  narrative  section  (vs.   4G-50,   or  also 
vs.  23-20),  devoted  to  a  detailed  description  of 
the  subject  of  vs.  22,  23,  and  containing  especi- 
ally the  statement,  that  the  turning  aside  of  the 
flames  from  the  three  men  was  due  to  an  angel 
of  the  Lord. 

Verses  24-26.  T/ie  liberntioii  nf  the  three  men 
from  the  furnace.  Thee  Nebuchadnezzar  the 
king  wa:  astonished,  and  rose  up  in  histe, 
viz.  :  from  the  chair  on  which  he  had  been 
seated  opposite  the  side-door  of  the  furnace, 
and  from  whence  he  had  witnessed  the  execu- 
tion. He  did  not  seat  himself  in  that  position 
after  the  victims  were  cast  into  the  furnace,  for 
the  purpose  of  gloating  over  their  tortures 
(Hitzig) ;  but,  as  a  king,  he  was  doubtless 
seated  before  (although  all  others  might  be 
standing),  and  his  position  probably  enabled 
him  to  see  the  inside  of  the  furnace,  in  whose 
immediate  vicinity  his  chair  was  placed.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  assume  that  his  seat  was  so 
near  the  opening  of  the  furnace,  that  he 
could  view  the  interior  perfectly,  and  thus  ob- 
serve the  three  men  together  with  their  heavenly 
protector ;  for  his  words  in  v.  25  may  be  readily 
explained  on  the  hypothesis  of  a  merely  spirit- 
ual or  visional  sight. — Spake,  and  said  to  his 
counsellors.  The  l'^"lr'^''^  are  councillors  of  state 
or  ministers.  coiigUiarii,  socii  in  judieio  (Sept. 
(pi'/M;  Theodot.  /;t;/(T7(iirf  ;  Vulg.  and  Syr.  opti- 
mates).  The  word  is  scarcely  the  Chaldee 
1"'"l'?'1,  "leaders,"  with  the  prefixed  Hebrew 
article  ,-;,  which  in  this  instance,  like  the  Arabic 
article  in  "Alcoran,"  "Almanac,"  has  become 
inseparably  united  to  the  word  (Gesenius) ; 
but  the  rt  must  probably  be  regarded  as 
an  organic  element  of  the  first  half  of  this  com- 
pound word  (as  it  must  be  considered),  whether 
that  part  be  traced  back  to  the  Sanscr.  sn/un, 
"power"  (Hitzig),  or  it  be  compared  with  the 
Pers.  hnmd,  "judgment,  counsel"  (v.  Bohlen, 
Kranichfeld).  The  second  half  13  is.  without 
doubt,  the  Pers.  var,  "  possessor,  owner."  as 
in  Vlr"'^  and  V"?"-!,  v.  2.  In  regard  to 
Ewald's  attempt  to  identify  the  terms  "l^'I'T!  and 
"laij  directly,  see  supra,  on  v.  2.  Compare  , 
generally  the  repeated  mention  of  these  promi-  ' 
nent  royal  officials,  in  v.  27 ;  chap.  iv.  33 ;  vi. 
8. — Verse  25.  IjO,  i  see  four  men  loose,  walking 
in  the  midst  of  the  fire.    1"??"^  is  a  regular 


part.  Aphel,  as  in  iv.  34 ;  of.  the  Chaldaizing 
B^2ir;?a  in  the  Heb.  of  Zech.  iii.  7.  In  opposi- 
tion to  Hitzig,  who  regards  the  form  as  a  meta- 
morphosed part.  Pael,  basing  his  opinion  on  chap, 
iv.  2().  see  Kranichfeld  on  this  passage. — And  the 
form  of  the  fourth  is  like  the  son  of  God  ; 
rather  "  like  a  son  of  the  gods."  It  is  b\  no  mcan.H 
necessary  to  believe  that  this  vision  of  the  king 
which  revealed  to  him  this  "son  of  the  gods" 
(■)in':s-n2,  cf.  the  plural  -ji-bs  in  fs.  12  and 
18)  in  company  with  the  three  Jews,  was  an  ob- 
jeclire  seeing.  It  must  be  observed,  that  here  as 
well  as  in  v.  28,  where  the  son  of  the  gods  is  desig- 
nated as  the  "angel"  of  the  God  of  the  Jews, 
Daniel  does  not  himself  attest  his  appearance, 
nor  does  he  refer  to  additional  witnesses,  but  in 
each  case  mentions  the  king  only  as  the  author- 
ity for  the  occurrence  of  the  event.  Kranich- 
feld's  hypothesis  that  the  king  employed  the 
term  "angel"  ('Hi!;;^)  in  the  second  reference 
to  the  son  of  the  gods,  in  consequence  of  the 
instruction  (which  is  to  be  read  between  the 
lines  after  v.  27)  imparted  to  him  meanivhile  by 
the  rescued  Jews,  is  unnecessary,  and  without 
support  in  the  context.  From  his  heathen  Ba- 
bylonian point  of  view  the  king  could  readily 
char.icterize  an  appearance  from  the  celestiiJ 
world  which  he  fancied  he  had  seen,  either  as  a 
"  son  "  or  a  "  messenger  "  of  the  gods  (or  of  one 
of  the  gods — for  only  thus  would  he  conceive  of 
the  national  God  of  the  Jews,  despite  v.  2(i). 
That  thtJigordc  ide/is  were  unknown  to  the 
ancient  Babylonians,  and  that  the  expression 
"  a  son  of  the  gods"  must  therefore  be  regarded 
as  a  conception  of  Hellenistic  origin,  which  was 
foreign  to  the  Orient  until  after  the  march  of 
Alexander,  as  Bertholdt  asserts,  is  wholly  un- 
true ;  and  it  is  with  entii'e  justice  that  Heng- 
stenberg  (p.  159  et  seq. )  while  opposing  it,  re- 
fers to  the  marriage  between  Bel  and  Mylitta 
and  to  their  offspring.  On  the  conception  of  a 
messenger  of  the  gods,  compare,  also  the  god 
Nebo,  the  "  writer  of  the  gods,"  who  corre- 
sponds fully  to  the  Greek  Hermes.  The  Sejit. 
however,  renders  even  the  pn??*.  ^?  of  this 
verse  by  ir/yeAof  Hen'r,  and  thus  avoids  all  refer- 
ence to  heathen  conceptions. — Verse  20.  Vhen 
Nebuchadnezzar  came  near  to  the  mouth  of 
the  burning  fiery  furnace.     On  "~^.  see  on  v. 

6. — Ye  servants  of  the  most  high  God.     The 

king  thus  designates  the  national  God  of  the 
Jews  from  his  heathen  stand-point,  because  he 
has  just  received  an  overjjowering  impression  of 
His  greatness,  and  therefore  regards  Him  as 
mightier  than  all  his  Babylonian  divinities.  Cf. 
pnbst  ri"S,  chap.  ii.  47  ;  also  the  Gr.  i'l/wcrnc 
i?fdc,  as  applied  to  Zeus  by  Pindar,  Ifem.  i.  90. — 
SfbS  SfS  corresponds  exactly  to  the  Hebrew 
VliS  b».  Gen.  xiv.  18.  Instead  of  S"^?  the 
Keri  has  ns^]*  in  this  place,  chap.  iv.  14,  and 
nine  times  elsewhere  in  the  book  —substituting 
the  later  form,  which  is  usual  in  the  Targuma, 
for  the  more  ancient ;  cf.  the  similar  Keris  ir, 
chap.  ii.  5  and  40. 

Verses  27-30.  27ie  effect  of  this  incident.  And 
the  princes  ....  being  gathered  together, 
saw  these  men,  upon  whose  bodies  the  fir 


102 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


had  no  power,  etc.  ;  literally,  that  the  fire  had 
possessed  no  power  over  their  bodies, — an  antip- 
tosis,  like  Gen.  i.  3.  The  Chaldee  of  the  Tar- 
^ms  constantlj-  substitutes  S?a"i"13,  a  fuller 
form,  and  analogous  to  the  SjTiac,  for  the 
era,  i«"9ril,  "  body,"  of  Daniel. — Neither  were 
their  coats  ( under-garments )  changed.  The  men- 
tion of  this  particular  article  of  clothing  only,  as 
being  uninjured,  might  lead  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  remaining,  or  outer  garments,  had  actually 
been  harmed  by  the  fire ;  but  that  the  writer  in- 
tended no  such  toning  down  of  the  marvelous  na- 
ture of  the  event,  is  shown  by  the  words,  ' '  nor  the 
smell  of  fire  had  passed  upon  them."  The  point- 
ing of  the  expression  ' '  on  them  "  (TlHS)  refers 
indeed,  to  the  persons  themselves,  but  it  fur- 
nishes an  indirect  testimony  to  the  preservation 
of  their  clothmg  that  is  unmistakable  ;  and  the 
testimony  of  the  passage  as  a  whole,  relating  to 
their  bodies,  hair,  and  under-clothing,  and  also 
to  the  absence  of  any  odor  of  the  burning,  con- 
stitutes a  gradation  analogous  to  that  of  v.  21. 
Only  one  of  the  four  gannents  there  referred  to 
is  here  mentioned,  and  the  first  is  selected,  in 
order  to  recall  that  enumeration. — Verse  28. 
Blessed  be  the  God  of  Shadrach,  etc.  The  dox- 
oiogy  correspond.s  in  form  with  those  recorded 
in  chap.  iv.  31  et  seq.  and  vi.  2(i  et  seq. ,  but 
is  addressed  to  Jehovah  himself,  in  a  precatory 
or  explanatory  form,  cf .  Gen.  ix.  20 ;  Luke 
i.  OS. — That  trusted  in  Him,  and  have 
changed  the  king's  vrord  ;  rather,  "  and  trans- 
gressed the  king's  command."  The  :i  before 
C^3^  is  Qlative :  "and  in  consequence,"  or, 
"  and  by  reason  of  their  trust,  they  transgressed 
the  king's  command ; "  cf.  supra  on  v.  22. 
U3;'2  r'b'Z  i<y^  is,  literally,  "to  change  the 
word  of  the  king,  to  alter  it  (criminally)."  The 
sameidiomoccursinEzravi.il;  cf.  pn  f|'bn. 
Isa.  xxiv.  5. — And  yielded  their  bodies;  cf. 
Acts  XV.  2G  :  an^/jwTOfc  -at}nfh(^a}\ooi  rnc;  V'X'H' 
nvTf'.n'  iTf/j  ror  ov6iiar''%  rnv  Kvp'uv — Verse  29. 
Therefore,  I  msike  a  decree;  literally,  "  And  by 
me  is  issued  a  decree."  -?:'3  S'''^'  as  in  v.  9,  and 
also  in  Ezra  vi.  11,  which  latter  passage  is  upon 
the  whole  very  similar  to  this  (e.g.,  because  of 
its  use  of  the  phrase  ?3  rii>3  **;'■?•'),  but  is  not 
for  this  reason  to  be  regardfd  as  the  model, 
from  which  the  alleged  pseudo-Daniel  copied  in 
this  place  (as  Hitzig  contends).  The  writer  of 
this  book  displays  too  thorough  an  acquaintance 
with  the  Chaldee,  to  warrant  the  assumption  of 
its  composition  by  the  process  of  a  laborious  and 
clumsy  compilation  of  extracts  taken  from  Ezra 
and  other  ancient  documents  ;  and  in  addition, 
nothing  is  more  probable  than  that  royal  edicts 
should  employ  stereotyped  phrases  to  enforce 
obedience  to  law,  threaten  punishments,  etc. — 
whether  the  respective  kings  were  Chaldieans  or 
Persians  (cf.  also  Kranichfeld  on  this  p.as.sage). 
— Which  speak  anything  amiss  against  the 
Ood  of  Shadrach,  etc.  The  Kethib  nba,  a 
Hebraized  form  for  St:-,  is  not  to  be  changed, 
with  Hitzig,  into  nb'i"  (  =  nis'lj  =  l^'^,  "  any- 
thing whatever"),  nor  to  be  replaced  by  the 
Keri  '-•-,  which  is  used  in  the  Kethib  of  chap. 


I  vi.  5  ;  Ezra  iv.  22  ;  vi.  9.     nilO,  "  a  fault,  smgle 
I  error,  offence,"  is  rather  a  concrete  term,  which 
is   related  to  the   abstract  ^b-,    "error,"   pre- 
cisely as  the  Heb.  "5??,  "  a  disgraceful  thing," 
is  to  rittjS  (Jer.  sxiii.  40),  "  disgrace,"  or  the 

Chaldee  HB':??  (Dan.  v.  19)  to  ^^btt,  etc.— 
Shall  be  cut  in  pieces.  This  threat,  which  was 
evidently  a  stereotyped  formula  in  royal  edicts, 
and  in  view  of  the  customs  of  Oriental  despots 
might  also  be  employed  with  reference  to  minor 
offences,  has  already  been  explained  in  chap.  ii. 
5. — Because  there  is  no  other  God  that  caa 
deliver  after  this  sort.  Thus  also,  among 
recent  expositors,  Kranichfefd,  who  takes  n;~3 
=  ovrij;,  ltd  ;  cf.  Sept.,  Theodotion,  Vulg.,  in  a 
feminine  sense.  The  masculine  form,  however, 
which  accords  better  with  the  syntax  and  tha 
context,  is  sufficiently  supported  by  chap.  ii.  43  ; 
vi.  29.  Therefore,  "that  can  deliver  as  He 
can. " — Then  the  king  made  Shadrach,  .... 
.  .  ,  to  prosper  (marg. )  in  the  province  ot 
Babylon.  n:^n  is  not  intransitive,  as  in  chap, 
vi.  29,  but  has  a  transitive  signification,  "to 
bless,"  and  is  accompanied  by  b  of  the  person 
prospered,  as  in  the  Heb.  of  Neh.  i.  11 ;  ii.  20 ; 
cf.  Gen.  xxxix.  23  ;  2  Chron.  xxvi.  5.  The  re- 
ference to  ' '  the  province  of  Babylon  "  indicates 
the  nature  of  this  hlessiug  or  prospering,  viz.  : 
as  a  repeated  endowment  with  a  position  of  ex- 
alted dignity  and  power ;  cf.  chap.  ii.  49.  The 
expression  "  made  to  prosper"  is  therefore 
equivalent  to  "  gave  prosperity  and  great 
power. " 

ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES  RELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLOGE- 
TICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETICAL  SUG- 
GESTIONS. 

1.  Oenernl  preliminary  observation. — A  cor- 
rect estimate  of  the  foregoing  section  impera- 
tively requires  the  recognition  of  the  peculiari- 
ties of  the  style  of  writing  employed.  That  style 
will  serve  in  a  greater  degree  than  any  other  of 
the  first  six  chapters,  to  exemplify  the  repeated 
observations  in  the  Introduction  respecting  the 
' '  theocratic  chronicling  style  "  of  our  prophet 
(cf.  Intrqd.  §  4,  note  2;  §  9,  note  1).  The 
whole  of  the  event  descrilied  is  considered  em 
phatically  in  the  light  of  the  stiictcsi  theocrafie 
pragmatism.  It  is  Jehovah  who  preserves  His 
devoted  confessors  in  the  midst  of  the  flames. 
The  heathen  executors  of  the  barbarous  decree, 
and  not  the//,  are  destroyed.  The  tyrant,  at 
first  blasphemous  and  presumptuously  defiant, 
is  compelled  to  humble  himself,  and  reverently 
to  acknowledge  the  superior  power  of  the  only 
true  God,  in  the  end.  At  the  same  time,  the 
narrative  possesses  a  peculiar  breadth  and 
minuteness  of  detail,  combined  with  a  con- 
densed brevity  and  force  that  recall  the  Lapidary 
style  of  records  relating  to  the  Assyrian  and 
Babylonian  empires.  Observe  the  frequent  re- 
petition of  identical  formulas,  and  of  changes 
and  series  of  names  (including  both  appellatives 
and  proper  names).     The  phrase,  "The  image 


CHAP.  III.  1-30. 


lOS 


which  king  Nebuchadnezzar  had  caused  to  be  set 
up,"  is  found  no  less  than  ten  times  in  the  first 
fifteen  verses ;  three  times  we  meet  the  expres- 
sion "  not  serve  the  gods  (or  "  the  god  ")  ot  the 
king,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  erected  by 
him."  and  the  characteristic  triad  "peoples, 
tribes,  and  tongues  "  recurs  as  often,  as  does  also 
the  triad  of  officials, '  'satraps,  governors,  and  pra;- 
fects."  The  sounding  list  of  official  titles,  "  sa- 
traps, governors,  prsefects.  chief-judges,  treasur- 
ers, judges,  lawyers,"  is  repeated  at  least  once  ; 
the  names  of  the  six  instruments,  "  the  comet, 
flute,  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery,  and  dulcimer" 
three  times  (on  v.  G,  where  the  " '  dulcimer "  is 
omitted,  see  the  exegetical  remarks);  while  the 
proper  names  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed- 
nego  recur  no  less  than  thirteen  times.  The 
explanation  of  this  extraordinary  wealth  in  re- 
petitions, is  evidently  not  to  be  sought  in  the 
careless  style  of  the  writer,  but  in  his  woll-de- 
fined  intention  to  impart  a  solemn  and  weighty 
character  to  the  narrative.  This  hypothesis, 
however,  which  is  supported  by  the  frequent  use 
of  a  similar  style  by  both  earlier  and  later 
writers  of  the  Old-Testament  Scriptures, — <'..(/., 
by  the  Elohist  in  the  Pentateuch,  among  the 
former,  and  by  the  writer  of  the  books  of 
Chronicles  among  the  latter — is  not  of  itself 
sufficient  to  explain  the  numerous  repetitions. 
It  win  be  necessary  to  assume,  in  addition,  a 
de.signed  imitation  of  the  solemn  jihrases  and 
stereotyped  formulas  employed  in  the  official 
documents  and  records  of  the  Babylonian  em- 
pire, on  the  part  of  our  prophetic  author.  The 
propriety  of  this  method  was  already  app.orent 
in  the  preceding  chapter,  in  view  of  the  repeated 
expression,  "The  decree  has  been  published  by 
me"  (vs.  5  and  8) ;  and  also  with  regard  to  the 
triad  "scribes,  conjurers,  and  Chakla;.ans"  (vs. 
2  and  10),  and  in  the  phrases  repeated  in  this 
chapter,  although  not  found  in  the  former  :  "  O 
king,  live  for  ever,"  and  "ye  shall  be  cut  in 
pieces,  and  your  houses  be  made  dunghills " 
(cf.  ii.  4  with  iii.  9.  and  ii.  .5  with  iii.  29). 
The  fact  that  such  stereotyped  formulas  and  re- 
peated phrases  in  an  unchanged  form  are  con- 
siderably more  numerous  in  this  chapter,  than 
in  either  the  chapters  that  precede  or  the  three 
narrative  sections  that  follow,  indicates  that  the 
writer  preferred  the  documentary  and  chroni- 
cling style  in  this  connection,  because  the  subject- 
matter  afforded  greater  inducements  than  any 
other  for  this  choice,  and  possibly  also  because  he 
had  a  special  inclination  to  narrate  the  event  in 
question  in  the  manner  of  a  theocratic  chronicler. 
— The  peculiar  coloring  of  the  style  of  narration  in 
this  section  unquestionably  affords  an  evidence 
ot  especial  significance,  for  the  hypothesis  postu- 
lated in  the  lutrod.  S  4.  note  2  (in  agreement 
with  Kranichfeld),  which  assumes  that  the 
writer  recorded  the  events  contained  in  chap, 
ii.-v.  at  different  times  (although  not  without 
regard  to  their  relation  to  each  other),  and  in 
the  form  of  a  diary. 

2.  Ajwlor/i^tic'il. — The  foregoing  remarks  con- 
tain features  that  testify  to  the  authenticity  and 
historical  accuracy  of  the  narrative  ;  but  a  far 
more  forcible  evidence  is  found  in  the  strong 
contviiiit  beticeen  the  situntion  and  circinnntunec^ 
of  the  persecuted  Hebrews  who  steadfastly 
clung  to  their  faith,  as  here  related,  and  the 
similar    fortunes    of    pious    Jews    in    the    As- 


monjean  age.  According  to  Bertholdt,  Bleek, 
T.  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  etc.,  the  motive  that  in- 
spired the  alleged  historical  fictions  of  the 
pseudo-Daniel,  was  derived  from  the  tribulations 
of  the  latter  period  ;  but  at  that  time  Israel  en- 
dured the  barbarous  persecutions  inflicted  on 
account  of  its  faith  in  Jehovah  while  established 
on  its  own  native  soil;  whereas  here,  the  suffer- 
ing is  imposed  while  in  a  foreign  land  and  in 
captivity,  and  merely  upon  three  individual  rep- 
resentatives, who  are  penally  prosecuted  on  the 
ground  of  the  slanderous  accusations  of  envious 
persons  or  of  politico-religious  opponents,  who 
charge  them  with  hostility  to  the  national  gods 
of  Babylon.  In  the  former  case  the  heathen 
despot  attempted  to  carry  into  effect  a  general 
system  of  persecution  which  aimed  at  the  extir- 
pation of  the  worship  of  Jehovah  ( 1  Mace.  i.  41 
et  seq. ) ;  while  here  an  occasional  denunciation 
incites  a  single  act  of  heathen  intolerance,  which 
is  immediately  followed  by  the  recognition  and 
adoration  of  the  God  of  Israel  as  a  pre-emi- 
nently powerful  divinity,  as  in  a  former  instance 
(cf.  chap.  ii.  46  with  iii.  28  et  seq.).  In  that 
case  the  furious  religious  intolerance  of  the  per- 
secuting tyrant  is  opposed  by  the  fanatical  de- 
fiance of  the  desperate  Jewish  confessors,*  while 
the  confession  of  the  three  persecuted  Hebrews 
in  this  case,  vs.  17  and  18,  reveals  no  trace  of 
fanatical  excitement ;  it  presents,  on  the  con- 
trary, "  so  moderate  a  reflection  on  the  interfer- 
ence of  God  for  the  purpose  of  delivering  His 
servants,  that  it  concedes  the  possibility  of  a 
refusal,  on  the  part  of  God,  to  deliver  in  the 
present  exigencj-, — for  which  reason  the  Sept, 
felt  constrained,  in  the  spirit  of  its  time,  to 
guard  against  the  possible  mistake  that  a  douljt 
of  the  Divine  ability  to  .save  is  here  implied  " 
(see  on  the  passage;.  Finally,  while  the  bar- 
barous custom  of  inflicting  the  death-penalty  by 
means  of  fire,  and  in  large  smelting-furaaces, 
prevailed  at  the  period  of  the  Chaldaian  supre- 
macy, as  is  certified  by  Jer.  xxix.  22  (cf,  xliii.  9 
et  seq.  ;  cf.  above,  on  v.  (i),  the  books  of  the 
Maccabees,  which  describe  so  manj'  modes  of 
capital  punishment  as  inflicted  on  the  Jews  of 
his  time  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (see  1  Mace.  i. 
50,  57,  60  etseq. ;  ii.  38  ;  2  Mace.  vii. ),  make  no 
mention  whatever  of  this.  The  burning  of  isolated 
fugitives  in  caverns,  where  they  had  concealed 
themselves  in  order  to  observe  the  Sabbath  (2 
Mace.  vi.  11),  was  an  unpremeditated  device, 
and  therefore  entirely  different  from  the  pre- 
determined punishment  by  meaJis  of  the  liery 
furnace. — Even  Hitzig  recognizes  the  weight  of 
the  numerous  differences  in  the  situation,  as 
here  indicated — to  which  must  be  added  the 
extreme  contrast  between  the  golden  image  on 
the  plain  of  Dura,  and  the  ,^iV'/v}ua  fpiiuuneur  of 
Antiochus  (1  Mace.  i.  ,54;  .see  above,  on  v.  1) — 
but  assumes  that  the  compiler  purposely  avoided 
an  exact  adaptation  of  his  types  to  the  circum- 
stances and  facts  of  his  time,  in  order  to  prevent 
any  suspicion  that  his  work  was  invented  for  a 

*  The  martyrs  in  2  Mace.  vii.  9  address  the  Syrian  king 
as  :  '■  Th'tii  accursed  man.''  and  in  v.  Z\  of  the  same  chap- 
ter they  denounce  him  thus:  "Thou  godless  man,  and  ot 
all  others  most  wicked,  be  not  lifted  up  without  a  cause,  nor 
puffed  up  with  uncertain  hopes,  lifting  up  thy  hand  again.st 
the  servants  of  God  ;  for  thou  has  not  yet  escaped  the 
judgment  of  Almighty  God,  who  seeth  all  things."  How 
different  is  the  language  of  the  three  Hebrews,  vs.  16  18. 
Cf.  upon  the  whole,  Ztindel,  Krit,  Untcrss.^  p.  73  et  ae(|. 


104 


THE  PROPHET  DA2^1EL. 


purpose  (p.  43,  "  Ought  a  type  to  correspond  so 
exactly  as  to  arouse  suspicion  ?  ")  He  thus  at- 
tributes to  our  author  an  art  in  concealing  his 
aim,  a  gift  of  refined  simulation,  a  practised 
cunning  and  adroitness,  that  might  excel  even 
the  efforts  of  modern  pseudologioal  tendency 
\\Titers.  But  while  these,  and  similar  charges 
of  such  a  critical  tendency  in  the  book,  are  un- 
worthy, and  establish  nothing,  the  manifold  ex- 
positions of  details  of  the  narrative  which  have 
been  deemed  necessary  by  the  modem  criticism, 
are  no  less  so.  No  improbability  can  be  dis- 
covered in  the  statement  of  the  dimensions  of 
the  golden  image,  giving  its  height  at  sixty 
cubits  and  its  thickness  at  six  (v.  1),  or  in  the 
remark  that  all  the  high  officials  of  the  realm 
were  summoned  to  the  dedication  of  the  image 
(vs.  2.  3),  which  is  unquestionably  to  be  taken 
in  a  relative  sense ;  nor  yet  in  the  mention  of 
certain  Grecian  instruments  (vs.  5,  7,  10,  15),  or 
in  the  occurrence  of  the  title  of  "satrap" 
among  those  pertaining  to  political  dignitaries 
(vs.  2,  3,  27).  We  have  already  furnished  the 
necessary  explanation  of  these  features,  and  also 
have  accounved  for  the  circumstance  that  Dan- 
iel was  abnent  from  the  ceremony  (see  on  v.  12), 
that  the  garments  of  the  three  martyrs  are  re- 
ferred to  by  names  that  belong,  as  is  asserted,  to 
a  post- Babylonian  (Persian  or  Greek)  age,  and 
finally,  that  the  decree  directed  against  the 
blasphemers  of  the  God  of  these  Jews  (v.  29)  is 
couched  in  terms  that  are  considered  extrava- 
gantly severe. 

o.  'I'he  mirride. — The  strongest  objections,  of 
course,  are  raised  by  opponents  against  the  de- 
liverance of  the  three  condemned  Hebrews  out 
of  the  fiery  furnace,  while  at  the  same  time  the 
executioners  are  destroyed  by  the  flames.  Hit- 
zig  holds  that  "  the  claim  of  this  narrative  to  a 
historical  character  is  unworthy  of  considera- 
tion. Its  correctness  would  not  only  involve 
that  the  nature  of  an  element  was  changed,  but 
also  that  the  flames  had  at  the  same  time  de- 
monstrated (v.  22)  and  denied  (v.  27)  their 
power  to  consume ;  and  a  reference  to  the 
angel  (vs.  2S,  2."))  does  not  improve  the  matter." 
— Our  exegetical  remarks  have  already  pointed 
out  that  the  case  is  not  really  so  desperate. 
Traces  of  a  certain  co-operation  of  natural  laws 
in  the  wonderful  event  are  by  no  means  want- 
ing from  the  text,  despite  its  evident  aim  to 
emphasize  the  extraordinary  and  supernatural 
features  of  the  incident,  rather  than  to  modify 
them.  The  excessive  heating  of  the  furnace 
which  the  king  had  commanded,  the  reckless 
haste  in  executing  his  commands,  which  his 
rage  demanded,  and  even  the  circumstances  that 
the  flames  issuing  from  the  upper  opening 
should  seize  upon  and  destroy  the  persons  em- 
ployed in  the  execution — all  these  taken  to- 
gether make  it  possible,  up  to  a  certain  point, 
to  conceive  how  the  condemned  persons  might 
remain  uninjured,  and  afterward,  on  their 
leaving  the  furnace,  be  without  even  the  odor 
of  fire  upon  them.  Nebuchadnezzar  believed 
himself  able  to  testify  that  the  efficient  or  co- 
operating cause  of  this  deliverance  was  the 
visible  appearance  of  an  angel  which  was  ob- 
served at  the  same  time  by  several  witnesses, 
probably  because,  in  his  fearful  excitement  and 
conscientious  terror,  he  really  saw  in  vision  a 
fourth  person  of  celestial  form  in  company  with 


the  three  victims.  The  writer,  however,  does 
not  personally  assert  such  an  objective  entrance 
of  an  angel  on  the  arena,  because  he  neither 
aims  to  positively  establish  the  fact,  nor  yet  to 
explain  the  philosophy  of  the  event  taken  as  a 
whole.  Without  seeking  out  secondary  causes 
of  the  deliverance  of  the  Hebrews,  he  contents 
himself  with  simply  certifying  to  the  extraordi- 
nary event  itself,  which  was  probably  reported 
to  him,  as  absent  at  the  time,  by  his  delivered 
friends  in  person  ;  and  his  added  remarks,  of  a 
religious  and  practical  nature,  refer  merely  to 
the  unmistakable  interference  of  hin  God,  whom 
he  represents,  after  the  manner  of  the  older 
theocratic  writers,  as  working  directly  and  with- 
out the  mediation  of  angels.  A  narrator  of  the 
Maccabajan  period  who  possessed  a  mania  for 
miracles,  would  exaggerate  the  marvelous  ele- 
ment of  the  event  far  more  conspicuously,  would 
describe  the  terrible  rage  of  the  flames  in  colors 
much  more  glowing,  and  would  introduce,  not 
one,  but  a  multitude  of  angels  as  instrumental 
deliverers.  An  approximate  idea  of  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  event  in  question  which  such  a  writer 
would  have  furnished  may  be  gained  from  a 
comp.arison  of  verses  46-50  of  the  apocryphal 
"  Prayer  of  Azariah  and  song  of  the  thi-ee  chil- 
dren ;  "  although  the  embellishment  and  descrip- 
tion of  the  event  attempted  in  that  connection 
are  still  within  the  bounds  of  reason,  and  would 
doubtless  be  surpassed  by  a  religious-tendency 
writer  of  the  Maccabaean  period.  On  the  othei 
hand,  a  writer  at  the  beginning  of  the  exile, 
although  influenced  by  an  extravagant  mania  for 
miracles  and  inclined  to  angelolatry,  was  not 
necessarily  without  a  real  beUef  in  miracles,  but 
rather,  might  possess  a  firm  and  living  confidence 
in  the  power  of  God  to  work  miracles  for  the 
deliverance  and  exaltation  of  His  faithful  ones. 
This  is  apparent  in  numerous  expressions  of  the 
exilian  Isaiah,*  and  of  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel, 
who  assert  miraculous  displays  of  Jehovah's 
power  and  grace,  in  the  proper  sense,  and  also 
express  conceptions  of  the  Divine  government  of 
the  world,  and  particularly  of  his  direction  of 
the  theocratical  people  in  the  past,  present,  and 
future,  which  are,  to  say  the  least,  decidedly 
supranaturalistic  ;  cf.  Introd. ,  §  1 ,  note  1 ;  §  9, 
note  1.  The  shallowness  and  triteness  of  the 
reasoning  is  thus  apparent,  on  which  Hitzig,  p. 
44,  formulates  his  conclusion :  "A  belief  in 
miracles,  such  as  the  writer  confesses,  could  not 
arise  and  flourish  in  the  night  of  the  exile,  in 
the  days  of  discouragement  and  despondency, 
nor  yet  in  the  centuries  of  servitude  (Ezra  ix.  9) 
subsequent  to  Cyrus.  The  deliverance  from  the 
fiery  furnace  expresses  a  supranaturalism  entirely 
different  from  that  manifested  in  the  additions 
of  the  reviser  in  Lev.  xxv.  21  ;  xx.  20 ;  Ex. 
xxxiv.  2,  4  (  ?  ),  and  seems  to  be  indicative  of 
the  enthusiasm,  the  increased  power  of  faith, 
and  the  boundless  imagination  of  the  Maccabae- 
an  epoch." 

4.  The  ethical  and  religions  importance  of  the 
miracle  is  found  substantially  in  the  consequent 
Divine  confirmation  and  rewarding  of  the  stead- 
fast faith,  by  which  the  three  Hebrews  had 
glorified  the  name   of  God  before  the  heathen 

•  [The  author  by  this  epithet  proliably  refers  to  the 
pseniio-lBaiah  assumed  to  have  written  the  latter  ehapten 
of  that  book — an  luinecessary  and  unwarranted  distice 
tjon.j 


CHAP.  III.  1-30. 


105 


monarch  and  his  court.  As  they  had  confessed 
Him,  so  He  now  acknowledges  them  ;  as  they 
haH  glorified  His  name  by  the  confession  of  their 
faith,  so  He  now  magnifies  Himself  in  them  by 
a  glorious  display  of  His  power,  and  of  His  in- 
finite superiority  over  all  the  gods  of  the  heathen. 
It  is  a  miracle  of  deliverance,  analogous  to  those 
witnessed  by  Noah  at  the  flood,  by  Lot  at  the 
burning  of  Sodom,  and  by  Israel  at  the  passage  of 
the  Red  Sea  and  of  the  Jordan  ;  but  it  is  none  the 
less,  on  that  account,  a  type  of  the  deliverance 
which  the  recording  projihet  should  himself  ex- 
perience when,  at  a  much  later  period,  his  unwav- 
ering devotion  to  Jehovah  had  brought  him  to  the 
lion's  den,  as  well  as  of  the  rescue  of  a  Peter 
from  the  dungeon  of  Herod,  of  a  Paul  from  the 
jail  at  Philippi,  and  of  other  miraculous  events 
of  the  Apostolic  age.  The  writer  of  the  epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews  therefore  classes  this  event 
among  the  Old-Testament  trials  of  faith  that 
were  followed  by  marvelous  results,  when,  near 
the  close  of  his  glorious  Catalngus  testium  fidei 
VetcrU  Testamcnti  (chap.  .xi.  ::i3i,  and  immedi- 
ately after  the  allusion  to  Daniel  in  the  lion's 
den,  he  refers  to  his  three  companions  with  the 
words,  they  "quenched  the  violence  of  fire" 
(ivT-ifcaii  iSiiaun-  -f/jnr).  In  the  same  sense,  and 
in  a  similar  connection,  the  first  book  of  the 
Maccabees  had  already  adduced  the  wonderful 
occurrence,  obser\-ing  with  reference  to  Hana- 
niah,  Azariah,  and  Jlishael,  that  they  -lartbaai'-Fc 
icuitrjcav  in  o'o;"';, — a  primitive  attestation  of 
the  fact,  with  which,  as  has  been  indicated  in  a 
former  connection,  the  assumption  of  its  inven- 
tion in  the  Asmon;can  period,  can  hardly  be  made 
to  consist  (Introd. ,  s  '')•  The  dogmatic  impor- 
tance of  this  miraculous  event  is,  however,  de- 
cidedly overestimated,  when  it  is  assumed,  with 
Beveral  church  fathers,  e.g..  Tertullian,  IrenaB- 
us.  Hlary.  Augustine,  etc. ,  and  also  with  Carp- 
zov,  Joh.  Gerhard  (in  the  Bihl.  Vimar.).  Joach. 
Lange,  etc.,  that  the  appearance  in  company 
with  the  three  men  was  an  actual  objective  fact, 
and  further,  that  it  was  not  merely  an  angel, 
but  the  personal  Logos  t'lat  was  made  flesh  in 
Jesus  Christ.  Jerome  is  far  more  correct  when 
he  rejects,  as  being  improbable,  the  idea  that 
the  Son  of  God  should  have  appeared  to  the 
godless  king  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  therefore  as- 
sumes that  the  appearance  of  the  delivering 
angel  was  only  a  typical  prefiguration  of  the 
Redeemer:  "  Cwttrum  in  typo  pritfiyurat  ute 
angelni siee  \1iUns  Dei'  Dominum  nostrum  Jesum 
Christum,  qui  ad  fornacem  descendit  infcrni,  in 
gtu)  ciiusa  peccniorum  et  justorum  nnimce  tene- 
bintur,  vt  absque  exustione  et  nnxa  sui  eos,  qui 
tenebfintnr  iiidnti.  rinculis  mortis  libernret."  His 
remark  (on  v.  1)  on  the  relation  of  this  event 
to  the  Messianic  mission  of  Israel  in  the  midst 
of  the  pre-Christi.an  world  of  nations,  is  also 
worthy  of  note  :  "  Dntnr  autem  per  occnsionem 
cnpticoruni  barbaris  nntionibus  snlutis  nccnsio  ; 
vt  qui  primum  per  Dtinielis  rerelationem  poten- 
tinm  cognocerant  unius  Dei.  in.  trium  puerorum 
qnoque  fortttudine  discnnt  mortem  contemnere  et 
idilu  lion  colere." 

5.  UomUeticiil  sugr/e-itiims.  Melancthon  has 
ccirrectly  specified  the  points  of  practical  im- 
p  irtance  in  his  observations  :  1,  on  v.  1  :  "Sr- 
entfiluin  huinana  ctfcitatis  et  audiwiee  institueittis 
noecsculius  sine  verho  Dei.  quos  hie  oitendit  se 
Jieui  reprobare  ;'"  li,  on  v.  13;  "  Quod  oporteat 


mandntum  Dei  anteferre  omnibus  rebus  humanis, 
potestnli,  legibus  huinanis.  piici,  tranquilUtati 
ntef-TmstrcB ;  "  3,  on  vs.  16-18;  '■^  Qualis  debeat 
esse  Jides  de  corporaU  liberatione.  videlicet  cum 
conditione.  si  Deo  placet  ;  "  4,  on  v.  22  et  seq.  : 
"  Glorificatio  piorum  contra  blusphemiam.  et 
poena  impiorvm.  prcesertim  satellitum.  qui  alieni 
furoris  ministri  sunt ;  "  5,  on  v.  25  et  scq. : 
"  Conversio  regis,  sequins  concionem  et  ghrifica- 
tionem  piorum. "  He  also  finely  develops  several 
of  these  points.  Thus,  he  remarks  on  v.  1  et 
seq.  :  "  Con.sider  that  not  only  the  one  Nebuch- 
adnezzar is  here  intended,  but  all  idolaters  in 
general.  As  Nebuchadnezzar,  with  fearfu' 
temerity,  but  still  under  the  impression  that 
he  was  acting  religiously,  est.iblishes  a  new 
cultus,  so  have  many  acted  at  other  periods. 
A  majority  of  states  protect  idolatry ;  and  even 
within  the  church  godless  popes  found  dynas 
ties,  and  seek  to  confirm  them  by  the  successive 

introduction  of  new  forms  of  worship 

Consider,  therefore,  how  great  is  the  guilt  of 
the  popes  and  princes,  who  defend  ceremonies 
and  traditions  that  contradict  the  Word  of  God, 
such  as  the  Mass,  monasticism,  etc."  Cf.  AL 
Geier  ;  ' '  The  great  lords  often  put  forth  greater 
efforts  to  introduce  false  religions  than  to  protect 
the  true.  .  .  .  It  is  a  false  opinion  that  all 
the  subjects  of  a  state  must  adhere  to  one  and 
the  same  religion.  Thence  result  so  many 
bloody  plans  to  effect  by  force  what  cannot  be 
required  with  a  good  conscience."'  Melancthon 
observes,  on  vs.  17,  18:  "  All  •  the  Divine  prom- 
ises require  us  to  believe  both  that  God  cun 
and  that  He  will  aid  ;  but  with  reference  to  His 
will  the  following  distinction  must  be  observed ; 
God  iriU  bestow  on  us  the  forgiveness  of  sins, 
justification,  and  eternal  life,  for  He  has  posi- 
tively declared  His  readiness  to  do  this  (John 
iii.  36  ;  1  John  v.  11).  Faith  in  this  must  there- 
fore shine  everywhere  upon  our  pathway  before 
us,  and  govern  our  expectations  of  various  ex- 
ternal blessings  and  supports.  But  the  latter 
must  ever  be  subject  to  the  condition,  '  If  it 
please  God,  He  will  now  deliver  me,' — a  condi- 
tion that  in  no  wise  conflicts  with  the  essence  of 
faith,  but  that  exhorts  us  to  obedience,  to  pray- 
er, to  patient  waiting  for  aid,  and  to  humble 
submission  to  the  only  wise  decree  of  God." 
Cf.  Starke :  "In  need  and  danger  men  are  cheer- 
fuUv  to  submit  to  the  will  of  God,  and  are  not 
to  prescribe  to  Him  in  relation  to  His  aid  and 
deliverance.  Their  motto  must  always  be,  '  Thy 
will  be  done  '  (Matt.  ixvi.  39  ;  cf.  Jas.  iv.  15  "). 
On  V.  23  et  seq.,  cf.  Melancthon  :  "Though  the 
deliverance  be  long  delayed,  in  order  that  we 
may  be  tried,  we  dare  not  cease  to  call  upon  the 
Lord,  because  supplication  is  never  in  vain. 
For  .  .  .  God  always  aids,  either  by  imme- 
diately imparting  comfort  and  diminishing  the 
evU,  or  by  granting  a  fortunate  escape  from  the 
tribulation"  (1  Cor.  x.  13).  Cf.  Osiander:  "God 
has  assigned  a  limit  to  aU  tribulations  and  per- 
secutions. If  it  appears  to  be  too  distant,  con- 
sider that  the  affliction  is  light  and  but  for  a 
moment,  yea.  that  it  secures  an  eternal  glory ' 
(2  Cor.  iv.  17 1.  On  v.  28  et  seq.,  Melancthon  : 
"  Learn  from  this  that  it  is  the  office  of  princes 
to  suppress  godless  teaching  and  customs,  and  to 
provide  for  truly  pious  instruction  and  worship. 
I'or  the  government  is  the  guardian  and  protec- 
tor of  the  whole  moral  law ;   it  cannot  chungfl 


106 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


and  renew  men's  hearts,  but  it  must  forbid  and 
prevent  idolatry,  blasphemy,  immoral  religious 
services,  etc.,  as  well  as  murder,  theft,  and  the 
like.  For,  although  a  civil  government  is  not 
enrolled  in  the  service  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  is 
nevertheless  the  servant  of  the  external  moral 
law.  and  the  responsibility  rests  upon  it,  as  a 
distinguished  member  of  the  church  (membrum 


prmcipmim  Ecdesia),  to  aid  and  protect  the  othei 
members  in  maintaining  the  true  faith."  ["  The 
moral  effect  of  this  transaction  must  have  been 
all  the  greater  because  it  was  the  final  outcome 
of  a  public  conflict  between  the  king's  god  and 
Jehovah  of  Hosts.  Nor  let  us  fail  to  note  that 
here,  as  usual,  an  unseen  hand  made  the  wrath 
of  man  work  out  the  praise  of  God." — CowU»\. 


4.   TJie  royal  report  concerning  Nebuclmdnezzar's  dream  relaling  to  Ms  unfitness  to  govern,  and  Hi 

fulfiUme^tt. 

Chap.  III.  31-IV.  34  [English  Bible,  Chap.  IV.]. 

1  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king,  unto  all  people,  nations   [tribes],  and  languages, 

2  that  dwell  in  all  the  earth ;  '  Peace  be  multiplied  unto  you.'  I  thought  it  good  ' 
to  shew  the  signs  and  wonders  that  the  liigh  God  hath  wrought  toward  [with] 

3  me.  How  great  are  his  signs!  *  and  liow  miglity  are  his  wonders  !  his  kingdom 
is  an  everlasting  kingdom, ''  and  his  dominion  is  from  generation  to  generation 
[witli  age  and  age]. 

4  I  Nebuchadnezzar  was  at  rest  [tranquil]  in  my  house,  and  flourishing  [green] 

5  in  my  palace.  I  saw  a  dream  which  made  [,  and  it  would  make]  me  afraid," 
and  the  thoughts    upon  my  bed    [came],  and  the  visions   of  my  head   ti-oubled 

6  [would  trouble]  me.  Therefore  [And]  made  I  a  decree '  to  bring  m  all  the 
wise  men  of  Babylon  before  me,  that  they  might  make  known  unto  me  [make 

1  me  know]  the  interpretation  of  the  dream.  Then  came  in  the  magicians,  the 
astrologers,  .the  Chaldseans,  and  the  soothsayers;  'and  I  told  the  dream  before 
them  ;  "but  [and]  they  did  not  make  known  unto  me  the  interpretation  thereof. 

'i  But  [And]  at  the  last  Daniel  came  in  before  me,  (whose  name  loas  Belteshazzar, 
according  to  the  name  of  my  god,  and  in  whom  is  the  spirit  of  the  holy  gods), 

9  and  before  him  I  told  the  dream,  saying,  0  Belteshazzar,  master  of  the  magi- 
cians, because  I  '  know  that  tlie  spirit  of  the  holy  gods  is  in  thee,  and  no  secret 
troubleth  [is  burdensome  to]  thee,  tell  me  the  visions  of  my  dream  that  I  have 
seen,  and  the  interpretation  thereof. 

10  Thus  [And   these]  were  the  visions  of  my  head   in   [on]   my  bed:  I  saw,  and, 

11  behold,  a  tree  in  the  midst  of  the  earth,  and  the  height  thereof  wax  great.  The 
tree  grew,  and  was  strong,  and  the  heiglit  thereof  reached  [would  reach]  unto 

12  heaven  [the  heavens],  and  the  sight  thereof  to  the  end  of  all  the  earth.  The 
leaves  thereof  jue;-e  [Its  foliage  urns']  fair,  and  the  fruit"  thereof  much,  and  in  it 
was  meat  [food]  for  all  [the  wliole]  :  the  beasts  [living  creature]  of  the  field  had 
[might  have]  shadow  under  it,  and  the  fowls  of  the  heaven  dwelt  [might  dwelH 
iu  the  boughs  thereof,  and  all  flesh  was  [might  be]  fed  of  it.  I  saw  in^the  visions 
of  my  head  upon  my  bed,  and,  behold,  a  watcher  and  a  holy  one  came  down 
from  heaven  [the  heavens].  lie  cried  aloud  [with  might],  and  said  thus,  Hew 
[cut]  down  the  tree,  and  cut  [lop]  off  his  [its]  br.anches,  shake  off  his  leaves 
[its  foli.ige],  and  scatter  his  [its]  fruit :  let  the  beasts  get  away  [living  creature 

15  flee]  froin  under  it,  and  the  fowls  from  his  [its]  branches.  Nevertheless,  leave 
the  stump  of  his  [its]  roots  in  the  earth,  even  [and]  with  a  band  of  iron  and 
brass  in  the  «e)tf/e;- grass  of  the  field  ;  and  let  it  [him]  be  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven 
[the  heavens],  and  let  his  portion  be  with  the  beasts  [living  creature]  in  the  grass 

J  6  [lierbage]  of  the  earth.  Let  his  heart  be  changed  "  from  man's  [mankind],  and 
let  a   beast's  heart  "  be  given   unto  him  :  and  let  seven  times  pass  over  him. 

1 T  This  matter  [Tlie  rescript]  is  by  the  decree  [decision]  of  the  watchers,  and  the 
demand  by  the  word  of  the  holy  ones;  to  tlie  intent  that  the  living  may  know 
that  the  Afost  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men  [mankind],  and  giveth  [will 
give]  it  to  whomsoever  he  will  [may  please],  and  setteth  [will  set]  up  over  it  the 
basest  [low]  of  men. 

Tliis  dream  I  king  Nebucliadnezzar  have  seen.     Now  [And]  then,  0  Belte- 
shazzar declare  the  interpretation  thereof;  forasmuch  as  all  the  wise  vien  of  my 


13 


14 


18 


CHAP.  III.  31-IV.  34.  10^ 


kinctloni  are  not  able  to  make  known  unto  me  [make  me  know]  the  interpreta- 
tion:  hut  [and]  thou  art  able  [capable]  ;  for  Me  spirit  of  the  holy  gods  is  in  thee. 

19  Then  Daniel  (whose  name  was  Belteshazzar)  was  astonished  for  [as]  one 
liour,  and  his  thoughts  troubled  [would  trouble]  him.  The  king  spake  and  said, 
Belteshazzar,  let  not  the  dream,  or  [and]  the  interpretation  thereof,  trouble  thee. 
Belteshazzar  answered  and   said.  My  lord,  the  dream  be  to  them  that  hate  thee, 

20  and  the  interpretation  thereof  to  thine  enemies.  The  tree  that  thou  sawest, 
which  srew,  and  was  strong,  whose  height  reached  [would  reach]   unto  the 

21  heaven,'^and  the  sight  thereof  to  all  the  earth  ;  whose  leaves  were  [and  its  foliage 
was]  fair,  and  the  fruit  thereof  much,  and  in  it  ^cas  meat  for  all  [the  whole]  ;  under 
which  [it]  the  beasts  [living  creature]  of  the  iield  dwelt  [might  dwell],  and  upon 
whose  Tils]  branches  the  fowls  of  the  heaven  had  their  habitation  [might  abide] : 

22  it  is  th.ni,  0  king,  that  art  [hast]  grown  and  become  strong :  for  [and]  thy 
greatness  is  [has]   srown,  and  reacheth  unto  heaven  [the  heavens],  and  thy 

23  dominion  to  the  end^of  the  earth.  And  whereas  the  king  saw  a  watcher  and  a 
holy  one  comin<T  down  from  heaven  [the  heavens],  and  saying.  Hew  [cut]  the 
tree  down,  and  destroy  it;  yet  leave  the  stump  of  the  roots  thereof  in  the  earth, 
even  [and]  with  a  band  of  iron  and  brass  in  the  tender  grass  of  the  field;  and 
let  it  be  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven  [the  heavens],  and  let  his  portion  he  with 

24  the  beasts  [living  creature']  of  the  Iield,  till  seven  times  pass  over  him;  this  i$ 
the  interpretation,  0  king,  and  this  is  the  decree  [decision]  of  the  Most  High, 

2o  which  is  [has]  come  upon  my  lord  the  king:  That  they  shall  drive  thee  from 
men,"  and  thy  dwelling  shall  be  with  the  beasts  [living  creature]  of  the  field, 
and  'they  shall  make  thee  to  eat  grass  [the  herbage]  as  oxen,  and  they  shall 
wet  thee  with  [from]  the  dew  of  heaven  [the  heavens],  and  seven  times  shall 
pass  over  thee,  till  thon  know  that  the  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men 

26  [mankind],  and  giveth  [will  give]  it  to  whomsoever  he  will  [may  please].  And 
whereas  they  commanded  [said]  to  leave  the  stump  of  the  tree  roots  [roots  ot 
the  tree]  ;  tliy  kingdom  shall  be  sure  [standing]  unto  thee,  after  that  thou  shalt 

27  have  known  that  die  heavens  do  rule.  Wherefore,  O  king,  let  my  counsel  be 
acceptable  unto  thee,  and  break  off  thy  sins  by  righteousness,  and  thine  iniqui- 
ties by  shewing  mercy  to  [pitying]  the  poor;  if  it  may  be  a  lengthening  of  [to] 

thy  tranqiiillitv. 

28  All  this  [The  whole]  came  ujion  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar.     At  the  end  ot 

29  twelve  months  he  walked  in  [was  walking  on]  the  palace  of  the  kingdom  of 

30  Babylon.  The  king  spake  and  .said,  Is  not  this  [the]  great  Babylon  that  I'  have 
built  for  the  house  of  the  kingdom,'*  by  the  might  of  my  power,  and  for  thc^  honour 

31  of  my  majesty  ?  While  the  word  was  in  tlie  king's  mouth,  there  fell  a  voice  from 
lieaven  [tlie  lieavens],  say/nr/,  0  king  Nebuchadnezzar,  to  thee  it  is  spoken," 

.^2  Tlie  kingdom  is  [has]  depaVted  from  thee.  And  they  shall  drive  thee  from 
men,"  and  thy  dwelling  shall  be  with  th^  be.asts  [living  creature]  of  the  field  : 
they  shall  make  thee  to  eat  grass  [the  herbage]  .as  oxen,  and  seven  times  shall 
pass  over  thee,  until  [that]  thou  know  that  tife  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom 
of  men    [mankind],   and    givcth    [will   give]    it  to  whomsoever  he  will   [may 

33  please].  [In]  The  same  hour  was  the  thing  [word]  fulfilled  upon  Nebuchad- 
nezzar: and  he  v-as  diiven  from  men  [mankind,],  and  did  [would]  eat  grass 
[the  herbage]  as  oxen,  and  his  bodv  was  [would  be]  wet  with  [from]  the  dew 
of  heaven  [the  heavens],  till  [that]  his  hairs  [hair]  were  [had]  grown  like  eagles' 
feathers,  and  his  nails  like  birds'  claws. 

34  '     And  at  the  end  of  the  days,  I  Nebuchadnezzar  lifted  vv  mine  eyes  unto  heaven 

[the  heavens],  and  mine  understanding  [knowledge]  returned  [would  return] 
unto  [upon]  me  ;  .and  I  blessed  the  Mok  High  ;  and  I  praised  and  honoured  him 
that  liveth  for  ever,  whose  dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  and  his  kingdom 

35  is  from  generation  to  generation  [with  age  and  age]:  and  all  <A«  inhabitants 
of  the  earth  are  reputed  .as  nothing;  and  he  doeth  according  to  his  will  in  the 
army  of  heaven  [the  heavens],  and  amonrf  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  ;  and 
[there  is]   none  [who]  can  stay   [lay  hold  of]  his  hand,  or  say  unto  him,  Wh.at 

36  doest  thon?  At  the  same  time  my  reason  [knowledge]  returned  [would 
return]  unto  [upon]  me  ;  and,  for  [as  to]  the  glory  of  my  kingdom,  mme  hououi 


lOS 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


and  brio^htness  returned  unto  [would  return  uponj  me  ;  and  my  counsellors  and 
my  lords  sought  [would  seek]  unto  me;  and  I  was  established  in  [upon]  my 
37  kingdom;  and  excellent  majestj'  was  added  unto  me.  Now"'  I  Nebuchad- 
nezzar praise  and  extol  and  honour  the  King  of  heaven  [the  heavens],  all  whost 
works  are  truth,  and  his  ways  judgment :  and  those  that  walk  in  pride  he  is  able 
to  abase. 


CRITICAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL   NOTES. 

[The  numerical  division  of  the  verses  in  chap.  iv.  differs  in  the  English  Bible  from  that  in  the  original  text,  as  the 
latter  annexes  the  first  three  verses  of  this  narrative  to  chap,  iii.,  and  consequently  begins  its  chap.  iv.  with  ver.  4  of  the 
English  Bible.] 

['  The  customary  phrase :  neruls  this  greeting,  is  to  be  mentally  supplied. — ^  Literally.  May  your  peace  (I.  e.,  prosperity) 
be  iiicreamd. — ^  Literally.  It  fxt-^  seemed  good  before  me.     The  order  in  the  original  is  also  emphatic:  T/ie  sirjns  aiui 

wonders I  (hare)  t/wjight  ii  good  to  shoip , — *  The  same  emphatic  order  is  observed  in  this  and  the  following 

Clause :  Jlis  signs  how,  (literally,  as  tcbat)  great  (literally,  very  great,  a  reduplicated  form)  I  etc. — ^  Literally,  a  kingdom 
qf  eternity. — '   ^i^sbm"^")  is  the  fut.  Pael,  with  J   epenthelic,  as  usual  in  these  forms.    The  te7tse  seeioB  to  express  the 

continued  effect  on  the  speaker's  mind. — ''  Lit^'rally,  From  me  was  marie  a  decree. — ^  The  terms  employed  for  these  various 
classes  of  conjurers  are  the  same  as  those  in  chap.  ii.  2.  except  the  last,  but  they  are  named  in  a  somewhat  different  order. 
— s  The  pronoun,  being  expressed,  is  somewhat  emphatic. — ^^  nS"^K  from  3X  by  resolution  of  the  dage^h. — "Liter- 
ally, Let  them  change  his  heart  from  the  man. — 12  Literally,  a  heart  of  the  living  creature. — Js  Literally.  And  thee  they  are 
driving  from  mankind  (the  man). — '*  Both  nouns  being  anarthrous,  the  meaning  is  a  royal  residence. —  *  Literally,  they 
aTe  sai/ing. — '«  Literally,  awrf/rom  mankind  (the  man)  thee  they  are  driving. — -'The  particle  "^"^S  is  emphatic=:^r 
this  time^  in  contrast  with  his  former  impiety.] 

the  narrative,  resulting  from  the  many  repetitions 
(of.  e.g.,  the  repetition  of  identical  or  entirely 
similar  turns  in  the  sentences  of  chap.  iv.  6,  15 
and  of  V.  5  ;  in  iv.  17-23  and  in  vs.  17-23  ;  in  iv. 
30  and  in  vs.  12  and  22  ;  in  iv.  31  and  in  iii.  33, 
etc.  1.  which  it  has  in  common  with  the  remain- 
ing narrative  .sections,  thus  indicating  liy  its  style 
that  Daniel  was  its  author;  (3.)  by  chap.  iv. 
25-30.  where  the  king  is  referred  to  in  the  third 
person,  while  elsewhere  the  first  person  is  con- 
stantly employed;  (4.)  by  the  designation  of 
the  palace  as  being  located  "at  Babylon,"  chap, 
iv.  2G,  which  is  positively  inconsistent  with  the 
assumption  that  Nebuchadnezzar  composed  the 
proclamation  in  person,  but  indicates,  as  clearly 
as  could  possibly  be  required,  that  the  writer 
was  not  a  Babylonian,  or,  at  least,  that  he  wrote 
chiefly  for  other  than  Babj'lonians,  aud  that  he 
even  adopted  their  modes  of  thought.  No  sub- 
stantial difficulty  can  be  raised  against  the  hy- 
pothesis that  Daniel  was  the  writer,  and  that  he 
composed  the  proclamation  by  direction  of  the 
king  soon  after  the  conclusion  of  the  events  to 
which  it  refers.  The  peculiarly  heathen  forms 
of  thought  and  expression  which  occur  beside 
the  Jewish-theocratic  (especially  in  ch.ap.  iv.  .5, 
f>,  10,  14.  15,  and  30),  find  a  sufficient  ei.plana- 
tion  in  the  consideration  that  the  writer  em- 
ployed, although  a  decided  theocrat.  w  ould  be 
obliged  to  adhere  as  closely  as  possibli;  to  the 
king's  habits  of  thought  and  the  range  of  his 
conception  in  the  framing  of  an  official  docu- 
ment to  be  published  in  the  royal  name — other- 
wise it  would  fail  to  receive  his  approval.  This 
view,  which  has  recently  been  represented  by 
Kranichfeld  especially,  is  at  any  rate  more  sim- 
ple and  natural  than  the  assumption,  which  be- 
comes necessary  on  the  supposition  that  Nebuch- 
adnezzar in  person  composed  the  writing,  thai 
its  theocratic  coloring  resulted  from  the  inst.ruc 
tion  derived  by  the  king  from  his  intercourse 
with  Daniel  (Calvin,  Hiivemick,  Heugstenberg, 
etc.).  Upon  our  hypothesis,  moreover,  it  be 
comes  easy  to  comprehend  why  the  writer  should 
occisionally  pass  from  the  first  to  the  third  per- 
son (v.*.  2.~i-;H0).  If  Nebuchadnezzar  ne  ccn 
ceived  as  the   author,   the   eicplanatioi.  of  thit 


EXEGETICAL    REMARKS. 

Chap.  iii.  31-33  [Engl.  iv.  1-3].  The  intro- 
duction to  the  edict.  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king 
unto  all  the  people,  nations,  and  languages, 
etc.  On  the  triad  "  people,  tribes,  and  tongues," 
see  on  chap.  iii.  4.  As  it  there  occurs  in  the 
public  proclamation  of  a  herald,  so  here  in  a 
royal  edict  in  writing,  and  at  the  very  beginning. 
This  probably  induced  the  persons  who  in  a 
former  age  arranged  the  division  [of  the  Hebrew 
text]  into  chapters,  to  include  the  introduction 
of  this  edict  in  the  preceding  section  ;  but  such 
an  arrangement  is  obviously  inadmissible  and  in- 
correct, in  view  of  the  evident  relation  of  verses 
31-33  to  the  statements  commencing  with  chap. 
iv.  1.  and  in  view  also  of  the  considerable  in- 
terval of  time  that  appears  to  have  elapsed  be- 
tween the  events  of  the  third  and  those  of  the 
fourth  chapter  (cf.  on  chap.  iii.  1,  and  see  ch.ap.  iv. 
2f)  et  seq  ).  A  certain  relation,  however,  exists 
between  the  subject  of  the  present  section  and 
that  of  the  preceding,  inasmuch  as  both  record 
experiences  of  the  exalted  greatness  and  power 
of  God.  stlch  as  had  come  to  the  king  in  the 
course  of  events  that  partook  of  the  superna- 
tural to  a  greater  or  siuialler  extent. — Like  this 
edict  of  the  Babylonian  king  Nebuchadnezzar, 
go  an  open  letter  (manifesto)  of  the  Persian  king 
Artaxerxes.  in  Ezra  vii.  12,  begins  with  a  solemn 
wish  for  the  welfare  of  the  people,  immediately 
after  the  names  of  the  king  and  of  the  person 
addressed. — Is  Nebuchadnezzar  in  person  to  be 
regarded  as  the  immediate  composer  of  the  pro- 
clamation? Such  a  conclu-ion  is  opposed  (1.) 
by  the  frequent  indications  of  an  intimate  ac- 
quaintance with  theocratic  modes  of  thought 
and  expression  which  are  found  in  the  document, 
and  especially  in  the  beginning  and  the  end  (cf. 
e.g.,  the  doxology  in  chap.  iii.  33;  iv.  31  ;  with 
Psa.  Ixxii.  4  et  seq.  ;  Psa.  cxlv.  13,  and  also 
with  Dan.  vii.  14.  27  ;  cf.  further,  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  infinite  greatness  of  God  in  chap.  iv. 
32,  with  Isa.  xxiv.  21  ;  xl.  17;  xli.  12.  24,  29  ; 
xliii.  13;  xlv.  9;  Job  ix.  13;  xxi.  22,  etc.); 
(2. )  by  the  broad  and  circumstantial  character  of 


CHAP.  III.  31-1  ;.  34. 


lOS 


feature  can  only  be  found  in  the  supposition  , 
that  the  report  of  the  king  is  interrupted  to  I 
admit  of  an  abbreviated  statement  by  Daniel  j 
(Calvin),  or  in  the  assumption  that  "  Nebuchad- 
nezzar considered  it  improper  to  report  his  in-  j 
sanity  in  person"  (Hengstenberg,  Maurer,  etc.), 
or  finally,  in  the  admission  that  verse  25  is  still  [ 
due  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  while  verses  20-130  are  ' 
regarded    as   a  parenthesis  inserted   by  Daniel  j 
(Havemick  ;  see  to  the  contrary  infra,  on  ver. 
25).*— Peace  be  multiplied  to  you;    literally,  ! 
"  increase  richly,  be  richly  imparted  to  you  ;  " 
of.   Ezra  iv.  22.     S^i^."";   corresponds  exactly  to 
■TTAT/dvinteir/  in  the  analogous  formulas  of  greet- 
ing, 1   Pet,   i.  2 ;   2  Pet.    i.   2  ;  Jude   2  ;  Clem. 
Rom.  1 ;  1  Cor.  i.  1.— Verse  32  [iv.  2],  I  thought 
it  good  to  show  (to  you)  the  signs  and  won- 
ders,   etc   ;     i.e.,    '"it    pleases     me." —     **'"? 
'«^™"■^  in  the  Heb.  trans.,  r  isni:!  rinis  ;  cf. 
the    weU-known    similar     combination     nir.ist 
n"'71!:i'2n,  Isa.  viii.  18  (Greek  ai/ina  Kal  Teparn). 
The  somewhat  indefinite  and  general  term  THi 
•'  a  sign,  token,"  receives  the  special  significa- 
tion of  •■  miraculous  sign"  (portentum)  from  its 
combination  with  "^r,  "a  wonder,  wonderfui 
thing."     The  same  combination  occurs  in  v.  33 
[iv.  3J.  and  also  in  chap.  vi.  28. —  ''^7K:  "'r'?' 
pulcrum  est  coram  ine,  i.  e. ,  nmim  est  mihi,  placu- 
it  mihi  (Vulg.)  ;  cf.  iv.  24;  vi.  2 — Verse  33  [iv. 
3],  How  great  are  His  signs,  etc.    iT^S,  quan- 
typere,  a  strengthening  of  the  simple  3,  quam. 
The  exclamation  does  not  by  any  means  deny 
that  signs  and  wonders  were  also  performed  by 
the  Babylonian  gods,  but  asserts  the  incompar- 
able greatness  of   the  miracles  of  Jehovah — a 
thought  which  Daniel  might  express  as  well  as 
Nebuchadnezzar, — His  k.ngdom    is    an  ever- 
lasting   kingdom,   etc.       The    same    doxology 
occurs  also  at  the  close  of  chap.  iv.  31,  with  but 
little  change.     Cf.  Psa.  cxlv.  13. 

Chap.  iv.  1-6  [4-9].  The  king's  dream,  liia- 
bility  of  the  Mugians  to  interpret  it.  I  Nebu- 
chadnezzar w^as  at  rest  in  mine  house.  '"  At 
rest,"  ('.(.,  in  the  undisturbed  possession  of  my 

*  [The  nuthor'-s  ar^iment*;  for  the  original  composition  of 
this  pa.'wage  by  Diiniel  are  plansible,  but  not  quite  conclu 
sive.  It  would  seem  that  ail  the  Chaldee  poitions  of  this 
book  are  .substantially  extracts  from  thearchive-s  of  theChal- 
■ilean  realm,  and  this  portioti  has  mure  than  ordinary  marks 
of  having  been  such  a  document.  The  record  of  the  facts 
would  doubtless  be  made  as  a  part  of  the  annals  of  the 
empire,  such  as  we  know  were  wont  to  be  preser\-ed  by  the 
mouarchs  of  the  great  Ea.st(E.-thervi.  1).  written  doubtless  by 
the  official  scribe  or  historiographer  in  the  vernacular  or  court 
language.  Thisaccount  we  may  readily  conceive  Nebuchad- 
ne/.zar  on  his  recovery  from  insanity  would  be  anxious  to  re- 
Ti-'ie,  and  he  would  naturally  select  Daniel  as  his  secretary  in 
publishing  an  authorized  statement  of  the  matter.  This  view 
accounts  for  the  mi.\ture  of  theocratic  and  heathen  senti- 
ments contained  in  this  extraordinary  coitfemion  of  royal 
humiliation.  Well  might  Daniel  recur  to  this  scene  in  his 
bold  rebuke  of  Belshazzar's  impiety,  chap.  v.  IS  et  seq.  The 
explanation  of  the  Jewish  coloring  of  parts  of  this  chapter 
by  the  hypoth'-'sis  of  a  later  interpolation  of  the  AIaccaba?an 
age.  is  amply  refuted  by  Stuart  and  Keil  (pee  likewise  our 
author's  apoloaetical  remarks  [No.  3]  appended  to  this  chap- 
ter/. These  writers  both  adduce,  as  corroboration  of  the 
account  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  madness,  the  statement  of 
Abydenus  in  the  fragments  preserved  by  Kusebius  (/•/vrp. 
Evang..  IX.  Vi.  and  'Miron.  Armen,.  eti.  Aiicher,  1.  p.  .5111. 
that  the  Chald.ean  monarch  was  seized  with  a  preti^rnatnral 
frenzy  (.«aTa<r;^t^cn)t^€i  oT«ta»  67  ....  0«oirta-ai)  while  walk- 
ing on  the  cop  of  his  royal  tower  at  Babylon.] 


kingdom,  which,  according  to  v.    19,  extended 
to  the  end  of  the  earth  ;   "in  my  house,"  i.e.,  in 
the  abode  of  peace,  not  in  the  field  in  order  to 
prosecute  warlike  enterprises.   Both  expressions 
therefore  refer  to  the  later  period  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's reign,  when  his  wars  (probably  includ- 
ing  that  against   Tyre,   Ezek.    xxix.    IT)   were 
ended,  and  he  was  able  to  devote  himself  to  the 
affairs  of  peace,  and  especially  to  the  erection 
of  the  great  edifices  at  Babylon,  to  which  v.  27, 
and  also  Berosus,  in  Josephus,  c.   Apion,  I.  19, 
refer.     The  time  of  this  dream  is  therefore  still 
later  than  that  indicated  "by  chap.  iii.  1. — And 
flourishing  in  my  palace.     i:?.7,  "green,"  not 
IjHbc,  "quiet"  (as  the  analogy  of  Job  sxi.  23 
might  perhaps  lead  us  to   expect),  is  the  term 
employed  by  Nebuchadnezzar  perhaps  because 
he  already  recalls  at  this  point  the  fresh   and 
strongly  flourishing  tree  (v,  7  et  seq.),  by  which 
he  was  symbolized  in  the  dream-vision.     Such  a 
prefatory  use  of  a  characteristic  feature  in  the 
symbolic  vision  was  the  more  appropriate,  since 
the  comparison  of  fortunate  and  healthful  con- 
ditions in  life   with  the  verdure   of  trees  was 
exceedingly  common  throughout  the  Orient,  and 
especially  so  in  the  Old-Testament  usage  of  lan- 
guage ;  cf.  Psa.  i,  3  ;  xxxvii.   35  ;  Iii.  10  ;  xcii. 
13  et  seq.;   Prov.    xi.   28;   Hos.    xiv.  7;  Ezek. 
xlvii.  12  (see  upon  this  thought,  my  Theohgia 
naturalis,  p,  495  et  seq,).     For  the  rest,  "W?"!, 
belongs   to   the    somewhat   numerous   class   of 
words  which  fell  into  disuse  in  the  later  AramtE- 
ism  ;  cf.   Pusey,  Daniel,  p.  oO'J-liOG. — Verse  2 
[5].  I  saw  a  dream  ■which  made  me  afraid. 
The  abrupt  connection,  without  n  or  Tl^?  in- 
dicates the  alarming  influence  which  the  sud- 
denly transpiring  dream  exercised  over  the  king, 
who  had  previously  spent  his  time  in  peace  ;   cf. 
Job  iv.    20,   and   also  the  numerous  antithetic 
asyndeta  in  the   Proverbs  ilntrod.  to  Prov.  of 
Sol.,  §  14). — And  thoughts  upon  my  bed,  viz.  : 
"came  to  me,  arose  in  me;  "   an  independent 
clause,  which  must  not  be  connected  ivith  the 
final  verb   ^;:iri2^,   hut   which  is   rather  to  be 
regarded  as  a  parallel  to  ~^.^n   -.n,  exactly  as 
-13-1   "''i.'n'l  is  parallel  to  "'^rrH"!^!  hi  the  former 
half  of  the  verse.     The  assumption  of  such  a 
parallelism  is  not,  however,  to  be  strained  to 
the   point   of   regarding    (with   Kranichf. )    the 
"  thoughts"  as  the  details  of  the  vision  itself; 
for  they,  like  the  "^-r?  ^'V^l  in  chap.  ii.  29, 
were  probably  the  troubled  reflections  of  the 
king  on  awaking  from  his  slumber,  and  whOe 
meditating  on  the  nature  of    his   dream  (Von 
Lengerke ;    cf .  supra,   on    chap.   ii.    29).  ^The 
l-i-irin  (=  the  V;^mn  of  the  Targums)  seem, 
however,  to  be  identical  with  the  Armen.  c/ior- 
hurd,  "  a  thought,"  and  the  word,  therefore,  is 
perhaps  of  Indo-Gerraanic  derivation  (thus  Hit- 
zig,   at  any  rate  ;   but  Ewald,  p.   477,  objects  ; 
cf.  also  Gesenius  and  Dietrich,  s.  v.  -iin). — And 
visions   of  my   head   troubled   me.      Exactly 
similar  to  chap.  vii.  15  b.     The  "visions  of  tha 
head  "  are  the  several  fancies  or  images  of  the 
dream,  as  in  chap.  ii.  28.— Verse  3  [(>].   There- 
fore made  I  a  decree.     The  same  words  occur 
ui  chap,   iii.   29 ;   cf.  chap,  ii,  5. — In  regard  tc 


no 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


'^??t'"!'^>  "se  on  ii.  35. — Observe  that,  in  this  in- 
stance, where  the  contents  of  the  dream  were 
not  forgotten  by  the  king,  nor  regarded  as  being 
especially  marrellous,  the  condition  of  the  king 
while  demanding  an  interpretation  of  the  dream 
is  very  different  from  that  described  in  chap.  ii. 
5 — a  circumstance  that  strongly  endorses  the 
credibility  of  the  narrative.— Verse  4  [7].  Then 
came  in  all  the  magicians,  etc.  Concerning 
the  various  classes  of  the  wise  men  of  Babylon, 
four  of  which  are  here  specially  referred  to,  see 
on  chap.  ii.  2.— Instead  of  ri"??  (read  pii;,), 
the  participle  of  bbs,  "to  go  in,"  the  Keri  in 
this  place  has  ''^^J'  (cf.  chap.  v.  8),  which  is 
contracted  from  T'ib?,  a  form  that  shortens  the 
initial  _  to  _  ;  with  the  latter  cf.,  e.g.,  V?"?"' 
chap.  iii.  IG.— Verse  5  [8].  But  at  the  last 
I>aniel  came  in  before  me.  The  Kethib  Vl'.ns 
13  a  form  with  an  undeniably  adverbial  significa- 
tion (=  "at  last,  posti'eino" — not  adjective: 
"the  last,  postremus,"  as  Hitzig  prefers),  that 
iloes  not  occur  in  the  later  Chaldee,  and  is  re- 
placed by  the  Keri  inHH  for  T.ns).  It  is  rather 
';o  be  regarded  as  an  extension  of  the  sing,  ad- 
jective formation  "'"ins,  than  as  an  irregular 
plural  in  which  the  «-sound  has  taken  the  place 
of  ''—  (see  Olshausen,  Lehrb.  der  hebr.  8}yrache, 
p.  208). — The  n5  preceding  is  the  familiar  con- 
junction "  until"  (Ezra  iv.  21  ;  v.  5) ;  the  whole 
expression  i^ns  -J>i,  "  untU  at  last,"  is  an 
adverbial  phrase  similar  to  3"'3£"  yz,  chap.  ii.  8. 
— Whose  name  is  Belteshazzar,  according  to 
the  name  of  my  god.  Cf.  on  chap.  i.  7.  This 
thoroughly  heathen  reference  to  the  name  of 
Daniel  is  immediately  followed  by  a  reference 
to  his  person,  which  indicates  the  feature  that 
had  inspired  the  heathen  king  with  confidence 
in  his  superior  power  and  understanding,  and, 
through  this,  with  a  faint  conception  of  the 
nature  of  that  Deity  to  whom  he  owed  such 
power  and  %visdom.  From  this  afBrmation  "that 
the  spirit  of  the  holy  gods  is  in  thee,"  which  is 
repeated  in  v.s.  C  [9]  and  15  [18],  it  follows  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  had  by  no  means  forgotten 
what  he  had  learned  upon  two  previous  occa- 
sions respecting  the  eminent  prophetic  gifts  of 
Daniel,  and  his  direct  intercourse  with  the  only 
true  God.  The  expression  does  not,  indeed, 
have  an  orthodox  look  from  a  theocratic  or  Old- 
Testament  point  of  view  ;  but  it  is  only  to  the 
half  a  heathen  sentiment,  similar  to  the  remarks 
by  Pharoah  in  praise  of  Joseph,  Gen.  xli  88. — 
V'?1P  is  probably  not  an  epilheton  omnm  of  the 
go<lB  in  general,  but  rather  a  special  designation 
of  the  ir,af)i)iSaiunvir  in  distinction  from  the  de- 
structive divinities  (Kranichf.). —  Verse  6  [9]. 
O  Belteshazzar.  master  of  the  magicians, 
t<''73D"n  :^.  This  title  differs  only  in  form  and 
not  in  substance  from  that  of  "chief  president 
of  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon,"  which  dignity 
was  conferred  on  Daniel,  chap.  ii.  48.  It  was 
by  no  means  necessary  that  Daniel,  as  the  pos- 
(Hsaor  of  this  exalted  dignity,  should  at  once 
and  without  ceremony  present  himself  before 
4he   king   with    the   remaining   p)3'>;n-      The 


more  independe/it  position  which  he  occupies, 
according  to  this  passage,  is  rather  in  entire  har- 
mony with  chap,  iii.,  where  he  is  absent  from  a 
large  assembly  of  the  officials  of  the  royal  court, 
and  also  with  chap.  v.  10  et  seq.,  where  it  is 
represented  that  his  character  as  the  chief 
magian  was  lost  sight  of  by  Nebuchadnezzar's 
successors,  but  not  that  he  had  been  deprived  of 
that  dignity.  Among  the  various  answers  to 
the  question  as  to  why  Daniel  was  not  at  once 
summoned  before  the  king  to  interpret  the 
dream,  instead  of  being  subsequently  introduced, 
the  one  here  indicated,  which  refers  to  the  free- 
dom of  his  official  station,  is  certainly  the  most 
simple  and  appropriate,  since  various  features  of 
our  book  appear  to  conflict  with  the  assumption 
that  he  occupied  a  political  or  priestly  station  in 
the  proper  sense  (cf.  on  chap.  ii.  49 ;  iii.  12  ; 
and  on  viii.  2).  Consequently  we  prefer  this 
explanation  to  the  many  which  have  been  at- 
tempted, e.g.,  that  of  Jahn,  that  '^miMom  re- 
quired that  the  chief  of  the  magians  should  not 
be  summoned  at  the  first ;  "  that  of  Fuller, 
which  considers  Daniel  as  being,  in  fact,  an  offi- 
cer of  the  state  (chief  satrap)  rather  than  a 
magian;  that  of  Havernick,  that  "the  7uiste 
with  which  the  terrified  king  caused  the  wise 
men  to  be  summoned  "  caused  the  overlooking 
of  Daniel  at  the  outset;  that  of  Kranichfeld, 
which  argues  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  already 
surmised  the  relation  of  the  image  of  the  fallen 
tree  in  his  dream  to  his  royal  person,  dreaded 
the  harsher  judgment  and  sterner  prophecy  of 
evil  to  be  expected  from  Daniel,  the  prophet  of 
Jehovah,  exactly  as  Ahab,  in  1  Kings  xxii.  8  et 
seq.,  summoned  the  heathen  wise  men  and  seera 
into  his  presence,  before  he  turned  to  the  propel 
source,  etc.  J.  D.  Slichaelis,  however,  observes 
with  entire  correctness,  that  a  certain  and  trust- 
worthy answer  to  that  question  would  require  a 
more  exact  acquaintance  with  all  the  facts  of 
the  history  than  we  are  able  to  command.* — 
And  that  no  secret  troubleth  thee.  ~rs<  .sig. 
nifies  in  the  Targums  "  to  sweep  away,  to  apply 
force,"  but  here  "  to  cause  difficulty  or  trouble  ;" 
cf.  the  Heb.   C:s,  "  to  compel,"  Esth.  i.  8. 

Verses  7-14  [10-17].  Subject  of  the  king's 
dream.  Thus  were  the  visions  of  my  head, 
etc.  ;  Uterally,  ' '  And  (concerning)  the  visions  of 
my  head  upon  my  bed ;  I  saw  ;  "  an  abrupt  and 
detached  clause  similar  to  chap.  vii.  17-2y. — In 
relation  to  "vision  of  my  head,"  see  on  v.  2. — 
And  behold,  a  tree  (stood)  in  the  midst  of  the 
earth.  T^"**,  unlike  the  corresponding  Heb. 
'pbs<,  does  not  signify  an  "  oak  "  in  particular, 
but  "  tree  "  generally  ;  cf.  ''pfr  and  robnr.  The 
position  of  this  tree,  "in  the  midst  of  the  earth," 
indicates  its  great  importance  for  the  whole 
earth,  and  its  destiny  to  develop  an  unlimited 
growth  in  every  direction  (cf.  v.  8).  The  tree 
thus  occupies  a  central  position  that  corresponds 


*  [Keil  reviews  at  length  the  variou.'^  reanons  assigned 
for  not  summonine  Daniel  jit  first,  and  conclndes  that  it 
must  nave  been  because  the  kint^  had  in  the  lapse  of  time 
and  varied  successes  meanwhile  totally  fort^otton  the  for- 
mer prophetical  powers  of  the  Heltrew  captive.  This 
would  be  natural  and  entirely  satisfactory,  but  for  the 
fait  that  on  his  very  introduction  into  the  royal  presence 
he  ifi  here  designated  as  one  po.sscssing  diviue  forekE,owI 
edge,  an  evident  allusion  to  his  former  eervicca  in  tcAf 
relation.) 


CHAP.  III.  31-IV.  34. 


ill 


to  its  exceeding  height.    The  symbolizing  of  the 
mighty  Babylonian  king  by  a  tree  recalls  the 
description  by  Eze  a  iel.  chap.  xxi.  3  et  seq. ,  which 
was  probably  not  known  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  but 
with  which  Daniel,  the  narrator  of  his  dream, 
must  have  been  acquainted.     It  also  suggests  a 
reference  to  Ezek.  xvii.  22  ;  xix.  lOetseq.  ;  and, 
among  the  earlier  prophets,  to  Isa.  ii.  13 ;   vi.  13 ; 
xiv.  12;  Jer.  x-xii.  1.5 ;   Anx  ii.  9  (cf.  also  the  pas- 
sages cited  above,  on  v.  1).     The  especial  fond- 
ness of  the  ancient  Orientals  for  the  illustration 
of  the  growth  or  decline  of  human  greatness  and 
power  by  the  figure  of  a  growing  or  fallen  tree, 
is  shown  by  Havemick  in  the  parallels  he  adduces 
from  Herodotus  (iii.  19  ;  the  dream  of  Xerxes; 
vi.  37  ;  the  threat  of  Croesus  to  destroy  the  town 
of  Lampsacus  Uke  a  pine  tree ;  cf.  also  i.  108 ; 
the  dream  of  Astyages  respecting  his  daughter 
Mandane),  from  Arabic  writers  (Antara's  Moal- 
laka,  V.  51,  5(i;   Reiske  on  Tariifa,  proleg.,  p. 
xlvii.),  from   the  later  Mohammedan  traditions 
(Mohammed's  comparison  of    a  Moslem  to  an 
evergreen  palm  in  Sunna,  according  to  v.  Ham- 
mer, Fundyrubeii  des  OrieuU.  I.  152),  and  from 
Turkish   history   and  literature   (the  prophetic 
dream    of    Osman    I.,    according    to    Murajea 
d'Ohssnn,    AUgem.     Schilderung    des     ottoman. 
Rciclis,  p.  273  et  seq.).     Cf.  further,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  general  use   of  this  tree-symbolism 
among  the  Greeks,  the  interesting  work  of  Bot- 
ticher :   Biiiimkultiis  der  Uelleiicn  (Leips. ,  1858). 
— Verse  8  [11].  The  tree  grew  and  was  strong, 
'•became  great  and  strong;"    thus,  correctly, 
Chr.    B.    Michaelis,    Hitzig,    and    Kranichfeld. 
The  finite  verbs  "~<,  and  i^p.ri  do  not  designate 
a  fixed,  but  a  becoming  state  ;   hence  Nabuchad- 
nezzar   sees    the    tree    growing    and   becoming 
greater   than   it  was   in   v.    7    [10]. — And   the 
height  thereof  reached  unto  heaven,  like  the 
tower    of   .Babel,    Gen.    xi.    4,    or    the    f^tvipea 
oiiiavouiima,  Herod.  II.  138.    Observe  the  imper- 
fect "S'2';,  which  here  takes  the  place  of  the 
perfect,  and  indicates  the  heaven-aspiring  ten- 
dency of  the  slowly  developing  tree. — And  the 
sight  thereof   to    the    end   of   all  the  earth; 
r.ither,  "  its  extent"  or  circumference.      i^r?Tn 
does  not  signify  "its  visibility"   (Vulg.,  Syr., 
de  Wette,  and  many  modems),  but  "its  outlook, 
its  circumference,   its   extent"    (the   Sept.  and 
rhsodotion  are  correct,  so  far  as  the  sen.se  is 
concerned :    "u  xi""!   airoi,  its  bulging,  exten- 
sion) ;   the  contrast  with  mail  would  itself  re- 
quire this  interpretation. — Verse  9    [12].    The 
leaves  (branches)  thereof  were    fair,  and  the 
fruit  thereof  much.    rr-ES,  properly  its  branch- 
ing, its  crown,  as  n2:s  is  the  aggregate  of  its 
fruit.      Bertholdt,    von   Lengerke,   and  others, 
render  incorrectly   "and  its    fruit  was   large" 
(i.e..  it  bore  a  large,  thick  kind  of  fruit);   for 
there  was  no  reason  to   mention  such  a  quality 
of  the  tree.     The  immediate  connection  shows 
that  the  great  quantity  of  fruit,  instead  of  its 
size,  was  here  referred  to. — And  it  was  meat 
for  all,  rather,  "  and  food  for  all  (was  found) 
on  it."     ''ilbi,  "for  all,"  i.e.,  for  all  who  lived 
under  its  shelter — an  exemplification  and  more 
circumstantial  exposition  of  S<^3?.     It  is,  how- 
ever immaterial  to  the  sense  of  the  passage  as 


a  whole,  whether  na  be  construed  with  11'^ 
by  neglecting  the  makkeph  between  Ki>2"^  and 
ns.  as  a  majority  of  expositors,  including  our- 
selves, translate,  or  whether  we  translate,  as 
Kranichfeld  [and  Keil],  with  regard  to  the  in*ih 
keph:  "  and  food  was  found  for  aU  o'i  it,"  i.e., 
for  all  the  birds  that  nestled  on  it.  The  maiora 
evidently  requires  this  rendering  here,  while  in 
ver.  18  (21J,  where  the  nuikkeph  is  wanting  from 
between  StbsJ  and  HS,  it  observes  the  other 
construction. — The  beasts  of  the  field  had 
shadow  under  it.  i'3?P,  ximbram  egit,  spent 
in  the  shadow.  The  aphel  of  bbc  ("  obimbrare, 
to  overshadow,  protect "),  which,  in  the  Ian 
guage  of  the  Targums,  is  generally  transitive, 
like  the  Heb.  i^^n,  1  Chron.  iv.  3,  is  here  in- 
transitive by  virtue  of  its  Xiphal  signification.  — 
And  the  fowls  of  the  heaven  dwelt  in  the 
boughs  thereof ;  cf.  Matt.  xiii.  32,  and  the  par- 
allel pass,age8.  The  masculine  V'"  has  its 
explanation  in  the  fact  that  T'^SV  is  of  the 
common  gender ;  the  Keri  T)"";  construes  the 
word  in  the  feminine,  in  analogy  \\dth  l?2~";i 
V.  18  [21].— And  all  flesh  was  led  of  it.  •'  All 
flesh,"  i.e.,  not  merely  all  the  birds,  but  also  all 
the  beasts  of  the  field,  and.  in  short,  all  the  ani- 
mals living  on  and  under  the  tree,  thus  imaging 
all  of  the  human  race  that  were  united  under  the 
sceptre  of  Nebuchadnezzar;  cf.  v.  19  [22]. 
Verse  10  [13).  I  saw  in  the  visions  of  my  head 
upon  my  bed ;  a  formula  designed  to  prepare 
for  tlie  new  and  remarkablj*  sudden  turn  of  the 
hitherto  quietly  transpiring  dream. — A  watcher 
and  holy  one  ceime  dowrn  from  heaven.  ^'2 
D^'lpl, .obviously  a  liendkidys  for  "a  holy  watch- 
er, a  watcher  who  is  holy."  n^r,  the  pass.  part, 
of  -iTij,  expergefieri,  designates  a  ■'  watchful  one, 
one  who  watches"  (cf.  ""?,  Cant.  v.  2;  Mai.  ii. 
12),  in  this  place  more  particularly  a  celestial 
watcher,  an  angel  who  from  heaven  watches 
over  the  fortunes  of  men.  Thus  Aquila.  Symra. , 
and  the  Sept.  :  eypi/ynpur  •  also  a  scholium  in  the 
Cod.  Alex,  on  the  dp  [a  transfer  of  T""]  of 
Theodotion  ((■;/)');  0()oc  Kai  a-;  pvTvvuf)  ;  also  Poly- 
chronius  :  tu  uypvTzvov  nai  ayyr/.or,  and  Jerome  : 
••  Sigiiificat  angelos,  qvod  semper  vigilent  et  iid 
Dei  impenum  sint  parati."  By  the  addition  of 
the  modifying  -^'lUI  the  l""^  mentioned  in 
this  place  is  expressly  classed  with  the  good  or 
holy  watchers  of  heaven,  and  thus  is  distin- 
guished from  the  KaKiKhi/mvcc,  in  which  light 
the  Babylonians  regarded  a  number  of  their 
astral  gods  (see  Gesenius  on  Isa.,  II.  334  et 
seq.),  and  also  from  the  >')p'riiip"i  of  the  book 
of  Enoch,  who  are  described  as  bad  angels  and 
as  inimical  to  men.  The  erxpression  "  decree 
(determination,  counsel)  of  the  watchers  "  points 
strongly  to  the  conclusion  that  the  V"!"'?  of  f" 
book  are  identical  with  the  ^erii  PuvXaloi  of  the 
Babylonians  in  Diodor.,  ii.  30 — i.e.,  with  the 
thirty-six  inferior  gods  associated  .as  counsellors 
( deos)  with  the  five  superior  planetar}'  gods ;  but 
the  entire  correspondence  of  this  feature  to  tht 


112 


THK  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Bab^-lonian  doctrine  of  the  gods  does  not  exclude 
the  existence,  at  the  same  time,  of  a  certain 
analogy  or  essential  relation  of  the  ' '  watchers  " 
with  the  Amex/^a-cptiiia  of  the  Parsees,  nor  even 
that  the  supposed  etymology  of  Amesha-(;penta 
=  noil  ammrens  xinictus  (thus  Bopp.  who  is, 
however,  contradicted,  e.g.,  by  Bumouf)  might 
be  asserted  m  its  support.  But  that  -"'"Pl  "ill" 
is  '■  merely  a  translation  of  Amshaspand  "  is  an 
arbitrary  dictum  of  Hitzig,  which  is  opposed  by 
the  possibly  post-Babylonian  age  of  the  name 
Amesha-Qpenta  (this  does  not  occur  at  all  in  the 
oldest  portion  of  the  Zendavesta),  and  which 
lacks  all  scientific  support,  to  an  extent  equal  to 
the  identification  of  "l"'?  wivh  T^^,  "  a  messen- 
ger" (Isa.  xviii.  2;  Ivii.  9),  as  was  attempted 
b}'  several  older  expositors,  e.ff.,  Michaelis  (in 
Castell.  Lex.  Si/r.,  p.  649),  cf. ,  however,  Hiiver- 
nick  and  Kranichfeld  on  this  passage,  and  also 
Hengstenberg,  Christologie  des  Alien  Testamejits, 
III.  2,  74  et  seq.— Verse  11  [14].  He  cried 
aloud  and  said  thus.  "  Aloud,"  exactly  like 
the  royal  herald,  in  chap.  iii.  4;  cf.  x.  16  ;  Isa. 
Iviii.  1,  etc.  — Hew  down  the  tree  and  cut  off 
its  branches.  The  command  is  addressed  to  the 
servants  of  the  angel,  who  were  perhaps  inferior 
angels,  and  whose  presence  the  rapidly  transpir- 
ing dream  presumes  without  further  explana- 
tion ;  cf.  Matt.  viii.  9,  and  the  parallel  pa.ssages, 
Isidorus  Pelusiota  already  is  correct  (Epj>.  1.  II. 
n.  177)  :  a)LOV(^  de  ^(jiT/Grv  tovc;  to  divdpoi-  t'iTtftri:tv 
TTpoarux'HivTa^  ayyiAirvr.  [Perhaps  KeU  rather 
is  correct,  who  suggests  that  "the  plur.  is  to 
be  regarded  as  impersomal :  the  tree  sliall  be  cut 
down."] — Shake  (strip)  off  its  leaves,  literally, 
"cause  them  to  fall  off."  IIPS  (instead  of 
llrs  after  the  analogy  of  verbs  third  gutt. ), 
the  aphel  of  "iC^,  which  designates  the  falling 
of  faded  leaves  or  blossoms  from  the  tree,  in  the 
Targums,  Psa.  i.  3;  Isa.  xl.  8;  Joel  i.  10. — 
Scatter  its  fruit ;  contemptuously,  as  if  it 
were  of  no  value,  and  as  if  it  were  not  worth 
the  trouble  of  gathering.  The  consequence,  that 
the  animals,  who  were  hitherto  sheltered  by  the 
tree,  were  now  likewise  scattered,  and  driven 
far  asunder — a  lively  image  of  subjects  alarmed 
by  the  fall  of  their  sovereign — is  indicated  in 
what  foUow.s. — Verse  13  [15].  Nevertheless, 
leave  the  stump  of  its  roots  in  the  earth, 
Ipr.  the  still  thrifty  stump,  like  P=?'?,  Isa.  vi. 
13,  or  17?-  Isa.  xi  1  ;  Job  xiv.  8.  The  ultimate 
sprouting  of  this  root-stump  (cf.  Job  xiv.  7-9), 
which  was  allowed  to  remain  in  the  earth,  typi- 
fied, as  appears  from  verse  23  [26 1  compared 
with  verse  33  [36],  the  restoration  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar from  his  sickness ;  but  not  the  continued 
supremacy  of  his  dynasty,  as  Hiivemick  inter- 
prets, since  "ip_5  in  this  passage  obviously  desig- 
nates an  individual,  Nebuchadnezzar  himself, 
instead  of  the  whole  race  of  Chaldsean  rulers. — 
Even  with  a  band  of  iron  and  brass;  rather, 
"but  in  fetters  of  iron  and  brass. "  Supply 
'■  shall  he  lie,  or  be  ;  "  or  even  •'  shall  he  be  left" 
("^""^■f")-  The  figure  of  a  tree  is  now  dropped  ; 
in  the  stead  of  a  vegetable  organism  that  neces- 
sarily clings  to  the  ground  there  is  presented, 
obviously  with  regard  to  the  bestializing  of  Ne- 


buchadnezzar, an  animal  organism,  which,  while 
naturally  capable  of  unimpeded  motion  and  o* 
an  individual  and  independent  participation  in 
life,  is  for  the  present  forcibly  restrained.  There 
is  thus  a  partial  transition  from  the  figure  to  the 
fact  (as  is  frequently  the  case  in  the  compari- 
sons and  allegories  of  our  Lord,  e.g.,  Mark  iv. 
28;  Luke  xii.  46;  Matt.  xxii.  13;  John  x.  11 
et  seq. ),  or  at  least  an  approximation  of  the 
figurative  representation  to  the  actual  conditions 
of  the  event  typified.  This  fact  is  misimder- 
stood  as  soon  as  the  attempt  is  made,  with  Von 
Lengerke,  to  conceive  of  the  fetters  of  iron  as 
fastened  on  the  root-stump,  ' '  in  order  to  pre- 
vent it  from  cracking  and  splitting,"  and  also 
when  it  is  assumed,  with  Jerome  and  others, 
that  an  actual  binding  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  a 
furiosus,  who  required  to  be  fettered  like  all 
maniacs,  is  asserted  at  this  early  stage.  The 
literal  conception  of  the  idea  "  to  fetter  "  is  in- 
appropriate on  either  method.  The  "  fetters  of 
iron  and  brass  "  svmbolize  the  chains  of  darkness 
and  coarse  bestiality  in  which  the  mind  of  the 
king  was  held  duiing  an  extended  period.  Cf. 
expressions  like  "chains  of  darkness,"  Wisd. 
xvii.  17  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  4,  and  figurative  descriptions, 
such  as  Psa.  cvii.  10 ;  cxvi.  16  ;  cxlix.  8  ;  Job 
xxxvi.  8.  Kranichfeld  observes  correctly  :  "  A 
more  forcible  binding  of  his  sovereign  aims  for 
himself,  exceeding  the  disgrace  of  that  which 
might  be  applied  to  a  prisoner  of  war,  could 
scarcely  happen  to  the  king,  than  was  that  to 
which  he  was  compelled  to  submit  according  to 
verses  22  [25]  and  29  [31],  in  the  form  of  a 
beastly  restraint  on  his  understanding,  and  of  an 
actual  expulsion  from  the  society  in  which  he 
moved.  And  since  binding  in  fetters  of  iron  and 
brass  is  a  metaphor  as  common  as  it  is  in  this 
instance  a  striking  figure  of  the  deplorable  con- 
dition to  which  the  Babylonian  universal  mon- 
arch was  reduced  ;  since,  moreover,  .the  tower- 
ing height  of  the  tree  in  the  dream  is  of  itself 
suflBcient  to  establish  th<^  selection  of  an  expres- 
sion to  indicate  the  corresponding  contrast  of  a 
severe  and  servile  compulsion,  the  explanation 
of  the  figure  does  not  require  the  combination 
of  this  expression  proposed  bj'  Hitzig  with  an 
assonant  /cednn,  Syr.,  'to  bind,'  taken  from  the 
name  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  This  is  the  more  ob- 
vious because  of  the  consideration  that  no  refer- 
ence is  made  to  the  name  in  other  portions  of  the 
description,  although,  by  a  repeated  use  of  the 
k  in  nebiik  (Nebuch),  it  might  to  the  Hebrew 
sound  portentously  like  the  Arabic  inbaka,  "  iur- 
brita  meiite  fuit."  For  the  Talmudic  animal  with 
an  ingrown  tree  which  resembled  man  in  form 
and  language,  adne  sadeh  (Bust.  Lex.  Cludd.,  p. 
34),  may  be  explained,  as  by  Hitzig,  without  any 
doubt  whatever,  from  the  ."■■*  of  the  name  Ne- 
buchadnezzar much  more  readily  thau  that  really 
fabulous  creature  would  have  allowed  itself  to 
be  fabricated,  had  not  the  self-authenticated 
description  of  Daniel  (verses  12,  13  [1,5,  16],  in 
connection  with  the  otherwise  familiar  "'?.'',*' 
the  heliolrnprnn  which  moves  its  leaves  (see  Buxt. 
1.  c. ),  furnished  the  material." — In  the  tender 
grass  of  the  field,  etc.  This  Ij-ing  in  the  grass 
and  being  exjiosed  to  the  dews  of  heaven  is  aa 
applicable  to  the  stump  of  the  tree  as  to  Nebuch- 
adnezzar, the  maniac  ;  cf.  verse  20  [23]  et  seq.— 


CHAP.  III.  31-IV.  M. 


113 


Concerning  the  reading  5*^^",  for  which  verse 
20  [23]  substitutes  "StriT  (corresponding  to  the 
Hebraizing  Keris  in  chap.  v.  39 ;  vi.  1),  of.  Hit- 
zig  and  Kranichfeld  on  this  passage. — And  let 
his  portion  be  witti  the  beasts  in  the  grass  of 
the  earth.  Cf.  verse  30  [38],  ''and  did  eat 
;fra.ss  as  oxen."  The  iigure  has  been  departed 
from  entirely  in  this  place,  and  a  feature  of  the 
interpretation  is  anticipated.  PrHi  "'portion," 
occurs  also  in  verse  20  [23]  and  Ezra  iv.  IG.  The 
Targuras  have  P^in  instead.  Concerning  the 
not  local,  but  telic  signification  of  3,  "  in  or  of 
the  grass,"  cf.  e.g.,  Joshua  xxii.  35  ;  2  Sam.  xx. 
1. — Verse  13  [10].  Let  his  heart  be  changed 
from  a  metn's  ;  literally,  "they  shall  change  from 

(thatof)aman"(i<'f':S"l'?  =  -i^?«  ^^'p,  as  Ibn- 
Kzra  correctly  adds).  Cf.  the  similar  bvemlo- 
quentifB  in  chap.  i.  10;  vii.  20,  etc.,  and  con- 
cerning the  active  signification  of  'V''-'^^.  (for 
which  the  angels  addressed  in  ^P?"'?  serve  as  an 
indefinite  subject),  cf.  supra,  on  chap.  iii.  4.  "His 
heart,"  i.  e. ,  his  faculties  of  conception  and  desire, 
or.  if  it  be  preferred,  his  consciousness  ;  cf.  verses 
29,  30  [33,  33].  The  Hebraizing  form  S^'^:^ 
here  and  in  verse  14  [17]  is  perhaps  to  be  re- 
jected in  favor  of  the  more  correct  Chaldee 
t«^':»  ;  cf.  verses  22,  29,  30  [25,  32,  33]  ;  chap. 
V.  21  ;  vii.  13,  etc.  [ — And  let  a  beast's  heart 
be  given  unto  him.  "The  heart  of  a  man  is 
dehumanized  when  his  soul  becomes  like  that  of 
a  beast ;  for  the  difference  between  the  heart 
of  a  man  and  that  of  a  beast  has  its  foundation 
in  the  difference  between  the  soul  of  a  man  and 
the  soul  of  a  beast  (Delitzsch,  Bihl.  I'ki/cIi.,  p. 
252)." — Keil.] — And  let  seven  times  pass  over 
him,  properly,  "change  over  him;"  ^?~,  a 
select  word  for  "  to  pass  over,  expire,"  priHerire, 
prmteiiiibi.  It  may  be  seriously  doubted  whether 
the  term  ^~"",  "'over  him,"  was  chosen  with 
a  special  reference  to  "  the  stars  succeeding  each 
other  in  the  heavenly  heights  above  the  tor- 
mented one,  which  were  to  indicate  the  duration 
of  his  affliction "  (Kranichfeld),  although  the 
mystical  phrase  ' '  seven  times  "  may  contain  a  cer- 
tain reference  to  the  astrology  of  the  Chaldaeans. 
The  seven  Trl"  are  seven  years,  as  appears 
from  chap.  vii.  '25,  compared  with  xii.  7  (thus 
the  Sept.,  Josephus,  Ibn-Ezra,  Rashi,  etc.), — 
not  seven  months  (as  Saadia  Gaon,  Dorotheus, 
Pseudo-Epiphanius,  etc.,  held)  or  seven  half- 
years  ( Theodore t).  T^?,  in  itself  equivalent  to 
"juncture,  emergency,"  receives  in  this  place 
and  chap.  vii.  25,  the  sense  of  ^?^'3  or  T3T,  "  a 
point  of  time,"  from  the  context.  The  dura- 
tion of  the  king's  punishment  as  extending  over 
8eren  years  is  explained  here,  as  in  chap.  iii.  19, 
by  the  fact  that  a  jiidiriiil  retribution  is  con- 
cerned ;  and  the  heavy  weight  of  punishment 
which  Jehovah  cau.sed  to  be  announced  with 
solemn  emphasis  to  the  king  was  accordingly  in- 
flicted, verses  25,  29  [28,  32].  The  number 
seven  is.  however,  not  to  be  pressed  literally,  to 
the  exten;  of  assuming  that  the  duration  of  the 
king's  8ic!;ness  covered  exactly  seven  times  3(>5 


days,  which  would  do  violence  to  the  always 
prophetically-ideal  pragmatism  of  the  history. 
Cf.  infra,  on  chap.  vii.  '25.* — Verse  14  [17]. 
This  matter  (message)  is  by  the  decree  of  the 
watchers,  and  the  demand  by  the  word  of 
the  holy  ones.  The  paralkiisiaua  meinbrwuin 
in  which  the  solemn  and  elevated  speech  jiro- 
ceeds,  shows  that  the  V"'r'''vP  are  here  also,  aa 
in  verse  10  [13],  identical  with  the  V"]"'?.  The 
terms  C3~S  and  S'^?*™  are  likewise  synony- 
mous, but  do  not,  as  Hitzig  holds,  signify  "mat- 
ter "  (concern)  and  "circumstance,"  but,  in 
harmony  with  their  etymology  and  the  sense  of 
;3rr  ii  chap.  iii.  16,  must  be  rendered  "  word  " 
(message,  announcement)  and  '"  demand  "  (com- 
mand); cf.  the  Heb.  ~;H'i',  "a  request,  desire," 
Judg.  viii.  34  ;  1  Kings  ii.  10  ;  Job.  vi.  8  ;  Esth. 
V.  6,  8,  etc.  Entirely  too  artificial  and  contra- 
dictory of  the  unquestionable  sense  of  '*"]:3,  '•  a 
decision,  resolution  "  (and  also  of  Tpstr,  "  a  de- 
cree, decision"),  is  the  attempt  of  Kranich- 
feld to  vindicate  the  signification  "a  request, 
petition,"  for  S*^?.".^",  which  is  based  on  the  idea 
of  a  petition  such  as  the  watchers,  as  inferior 
^ml  li'w'/.alm  (see  on  verse  10  [13]),  were  obliged 
to  address  to  their  superiors,  the  five  planetary 
gods.  But  the  V:^<  appear  nevertheless  to  be 
advisory  deities,  inasmuch  as  they  are  only 
'\""l''",  and  not  V~~?*,  and  inasmuch  as  the 
supreme  decision  in  their  college  rests,  accord- 
ing to  verse  21   [24],  with   the   "Most    High" 

*  [Keil,  on  the  other  hand,  contends  that  '■  from  ver,  26 
the  duration  of  the  '^"'3'^^  cannot  at  all  be  concluded,  and  in 

chap.  vii.  25.  and  xii.  7,  the  times  are  not  years.   ■','1T  de.<sig- 

nattfs  generally  a  definite  period  of  time,  whose  length  or  du- 
ration may  be  very  different.  '•  Seven  is  the  *  nieasuie  and  sig- 
nature of  the  hietory  of  the  developmet)t  of  the  kin'jdom  of 
God,  and  of  all  the  factors  ind  phenomena  Bignificalit  for 
it"  (Liimmett's  Revixiuii  of  thit  Bibticitt  or  Stfinboli<:al 
Number^!,  in  the  Jahrb.f.  dentnche  7'henl.,  IX.  p.  II).  or  aa 
Leyrer.  in  Herzog's  Jienleiicykl,.  XVIII.  p.  :-.»»(),  expresfiea 
himself,  'the  si<jnature  for  all  the  actions  of  (rod,  in  jadg- 
ment  and  in  mercv,  puniPhmenta,  expiat'ons,  con-^fcrations, 
blessings,  conserrated  with  the  economy  of  redemption,  per- 
fecting themselves  in  time.'  Accordingly,  'seven  times'  is 
the  duration  of  the  divine  punishment  which  was  decreed 
against  Nebuchadnezzar  for  purposes  connected  with  the 
history  of  redemption.  Whether  these  times  are  to  be  im- 
derstood  as  ycar>,  months,  or  weeks  is  not  said,  and  cannot 
at  all  be  determined.  The  supposition  that  they  were  seven 
years  '  cannot  well  be  adopted  in  opposition  to  the  circum- 
sUince  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  again  restored  to  reason,  a 
thing  that  very  rarely  occurs,  after  so  long  a  continuance 
of  psychical  disease'  (J.  B.  Friedrich,  Zur  Bibl  ]^aturhint., 
aiulirop.  u.  inetl.  Fra^mente,  I.  p.  .31()),"  This  last  argu- 
ment, however,  is  of  little  force,  in  view  of  the  evidently 
miraculous,  or  at  least  specially  providentjal,  character  of 
the  entire  event.  *'C.  B.  Michaelis,  Geeenius,  Rosenimiller, 
Winer,  Lengerke,  and  nearly  all  the  critics  agree  that  j/ear 
is  the  probable  meaning." — Stuart.  The  supposed  dilhculty 
of  the  management  of  the  empire  during  so  long  a  }ieriod 
of  the  king's  incapacity  is  fairly  disposed  of  by  Stuart,  by  • 
reference  to  Berosus,  who  states  that  on  Nebuchadnezzar's 
return  to  his  capital,  after  his  protracted  absence  during  his 
wars  m  Western  Asia,  upon  his  father's  death,  ''he  took 
upon  himself  the  affairs  which  hatl  been  m.inaged  by  the 
Chaldees  [Magi],  and  the  royal  authi>r;ty  wliich  had  been 
preserved  far  him  Inj  their  cf  tie f^^  ( Josephu.-.  .Aiitiq.,  X.  II, 
I. )  Geo.  Rawlinson  was  inclined  to  find  a  trace  of  this  in- 
terniption  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  government  in  the  period  of 
four  years'  inactivity  noted  in  his  annals  {IJi^toricnl  Evi- 
ftence-s.  p.  1.^7)  on  the  '•  Spaniard  Inscri|>tion  "  (Herodotua, 
II.  485) ;  but  he  has  since  doubted  the  reference  (/"/ce  Jfo* 
archies.  III.  60).] 


114 


THE  PROPHET  DA^flEL. 


(s'^iS).  Cf.  the  representation  erf  a  great  sub- 
ordinate council  of  the  Deity  as  composed  of 
angels  in  1  Kings  xxii.  19  et  seq.  ;  Job  ii.  1  et 
seq. ;  and  also,  with  reference  to  the  specifi- 
cally Babylonian  idea  of  a  decision  in  the  coun- 
cil of  the  deity,  Diodor.  ii.  30 :  ol  6'ovv  XaMaioi 
— pnatv  Tt/v  TL}V  uALiV  rd^iv  Kai  dianonfjijoiv  ^eia 
Tivl  npovoia  yEyovevai.^  kol  vvv  knaora  tliv  ev  ovpavtj> 
yivouh'otv    ovx    ^f     irvxsv     oitd'    airo/idrwf,    cAX' 

upiGfilvT}    Tivl    Kal    (ieliai<MiQ     KEKVptJfiivri     i^ECJV    Kpictt 

cvvTe2.eiadai ;  further,  the  familiar  picture  near 
Kazwini,  which  represents  Bel  as  a  judge  and 
surrounded  by  genii  (Gesen.,  ml  Isa.,  ii.  337). 
Before  ^^K^p,  "a  decree,"  the  instrumental  3 
must  be  supplied  from  the  preceding.  The 
variation  T2S?a21  is,  therefore,  correctly  sup- 
plied in  the  interpretation.  — To  the  intent  that 
the  living  may  know  that  the  Most  High 
ruleth,  etc.  "'T  ri::'!"!!''  is  to  be  rendered, 
either  "until,  to  the  circumstance,  that"  = 
"until  that"  (doatc,  Vulg. ),  or,  with  Hitzig,  in 
harmony  with  chap.  ii.  30,  and  with  the  Iva 
jiijod'of  Theodotion,  "^T  r"in"l"bs,  -'totheend 
that."  The  latter  may  perhaps  be  preferred, 
because  of  the  ease  of  mistaking  j?  for  ^S',  and 
because  of  the  fact  that  fll.^'l  IS  does  not 
occur  elsewhere.*  Verse  22  [25],  which  directly 
substitutes  l"i:ri  for  the  '^'S'TjI  of  this  verse, 
shows  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  ruler  of  the 
earth,  is  not  excluded  from  the  number  of  the 
'  ■  living  "  who  are  to  recognize  the  authority  of 
the  Most  High,  but  rather,  that  he  especially  is 
included. — And  setteth  up  (rather,  "can  set 
up" I  over  it  the  basest  of  men.  Q"''^ps«  i?"i"i 
"the  humblest  of  men,"  is  grammatically  a 
general  conception  conveying  the  idea  of  the 
superlative,  as  in  2  Chron.  xxi.  17,  the  Heb. 
v;a  Pp  ;  cf.  Winer,  Chald.  Gramm.,  §  58,  2. 
The  assertion  of  Hitzig,  that  by  this  humblest 
of  mtn,  an  Israelite,  or  even  the  Israelitish  Mes- 
siah ('ii;:^^  13,  chap.  vii.  13),  is  designated  as 
successor  to  the  great  world-monarch,  is  with- 
out support  from  the  context.  The  thought  of 
a  person  of  the  lowest  rank,  rather,  was  natur- 
ally suggested  to  the  mind  of  the  dreaming  king, 
because  the  fall  of  himself,  the  most  exalted 
man,  was  concerned. — For  the  opinion  that  the 
imperfects  nrP"  and  D^p^  in  this  place  express 
the  idea  of  ability — "  is  able  to  confer,  can  exalt " 
— cf.  chap.  ii.  47,  where  ']'']')  njjj  also  desig- 
nates that  Being  who  is  able  to  reveal  secrets. 
[ — "The  Kcthib  n^'^y  is  shortened  from  S^"'?!!'.' 
md  in  the  Keri  is  yet  further  shortened  by  the 
rejection  of  the  i  ;  cf.  chap.  v.  21;  vii.  4  sq., 
etc  " — Keil.  ] 

Verse  15  [18j.  Darnel  required  to  interpret  the 
dream.     This  dream  I  king  Nebuchadnezzar 

•  [Keil,  however,  justly  claims  that  "the  change  of  15 
to  iz!  is  unDecefis.try  and  arbitrary.    The  expression  is  gen- 

ei\il.  beraiiwp  it  is  not  yet  said  who  is  to  be  understood  by 
ttie  tr<ie  thiit  is  to  be  cut  down.  Ttiif,  general  expression  is 
in  reality  correct :  for  the  king  conies  by  experience  to  this 
knowledge,  and  so  all  will  atta  n  to  it  wLo  consider  this."] 


have  seen.  The  demonstrative  n:!  is  placed 
first  for  emphasi.-i,  thus  corresponding  to  the 
disturbing  and  exciting  subject  of  the  dream. 
The  predicative  rendering,  "  This  is  the  dream, 
which,"  etc.,  is  opposed  by  the  rule  that  the 
relative  cannot  be  omitted  after  the  designated 
noun  (Winer,  §  41,  4). — Declare  the  interpre- 
tation thereof.  S«"i!L"S,  is  a  softened  form  for 
(Tl'wD,  "  its  interpretation,"  in  this  place,  v.  16 
[19],  and  chap.  v.  8.  This  view  is  confirmed  by 
the  Peshito,  while  Theodotion  and  the  Vulgate 
have  S'l/'r?)  which  reading  is  still  represented 
among  modems,  e.g.,  by  Hitzig. — On  the  close 
of  the  verse,  cf.  6  [9]. 
Verses    16-24    [19-27].      The  interpretation. 

Then  Daniel was  astonished  for 

(about)  one  hour.  On  the  reading  CKiri".^!* 
instead  of  t^P^,  cf.'  Winer,  §  25,  2.  Several 
MSS.  have  nrca  instead  of  ri^'t-S,  but  this 
reading  conflicts  with  the  usage  of  the  context, 
and  also  with  the  testimony  of  the  ancient  trans- 
lators (Thfcodot.,  Vulg.,  Syr.,  and  probably  with 
the  Sept.).  Concerning  the  etymology  of  ~''1V"' 
"hour,"  which  is  certainly  to  be  taken  here  in 
the  literal  sense,  cf.  on  chap.  iii.  6.*  That  the 
astonished  gazing  of  Daniel  continued  "about 
an  hour,"  is  mentioned  by  the  author  from  a 
motive  (viz.,  in  order  to  indicate  the  greatness 
of  his  astonishment)  similar  to  that  from  which 
the  book  of  Job  records  the  sympathetic  mourn- 
ing and  silence  of  the  three  friends  during  seven 
days  (Job  ii.  13).  Hitzig  observes  correctly  : 
"  He  meditates  on  the  interpretation,  and  is  as- 
tonished when  he  perceives  it.  because  he  wishes 
well  to  the  king,  and  probably,  also,  because 
Nebuchadnezzar  might  receive  the  prophecy  un- 
graciously, and  might  take  vengeance  on  him  (aa 
Ahab  did  on  Micaiah.  1  Kings  xxii.  26,  27).  His 
confusion  is  depicted  on  his  countenance  ;  which 
causes  the  king  to  observe  that  he  has  found  the 
interpretation,  and  to  invite  him  in  encouraging 
terms  to  impart  it  freely. "  It  cannot  really  be 
comprehended  how  it  is  possible,  in  the  face  of 
so  unsought-for,  and,  in  itself,  probable  a  his- 
torical situation,  to  establish  the  hyjiothesis  of  a 
conventional  forgery  in  the  Maccabtean  age. — 
["That  Nebuchadnezzar  (ver.  16  [19])  in  his 
account  speaks  in  the  third  person  does  not  jus- 
tify the  conclusion  either  that  another  spoke  of 
him,  and  that  thus  the  document  is  not  genuine 
(Hitzig),  nor  yet  the  conclusion  that  this  verse 
includes  a  historical  notice  introduced  as  an  in- 
terpolation into  the  document ;  for  similar  forms 
of  expression  are  often  found  in  such  documents  ; 
cf.  Ezra  vii.  13-15  ;  Esth.  viii.  7,  8."— AViV.]  — 
IVIy  lord,  the  dream  be  to  them  that  hate 
thee,  and  the  interpretation  thereof  to  thine 
enemies  !  i.e..  Would  that  the  dream  concerned 
thine  enemies,  and  that  its  interpretation  related 


*  [Keil.  however,  insists  that  the  terra  here  means  "ap 
it  were  an  instant,  a  nwrneitt."  But  so  brief  a  delay  would 
seem  altogether  insignificant,  and  could  have  excited  little 
surprise,  or  called  for  any  urging  on  the  part  of  the  king. 
Stuart,  on  the  other  hand,  regards  so  long  a  hesitat  on  as 
an  hour  ns  "  very  improbable,"  and  therefore  addufcs  the 
derivation  of  nyHJ  («  looi,  GeToi.  aur/eiib  ict,  Hcb.  ri"! 

as  favoring  the  signification  rtn  instant ;  and  in  taie  inter 
pretation  Gescnins  and  Furst  both  coincide.] 


CHAP.  III.  31-IV.  34. 


115 


to  thy  foes  rather  than  to  thee  !  Instead  of  the 
Kethib  ^^"'?  (-a  regular  formation  from  S«"l^' 
chap.  ii.  47  ;  v.  23),  the  Keri  has,  here  and  in 
V.  21  [24],  the  shorter  form  "^"l?:,  which  corre- 
sponds to  the  usage  of  the  later  Chaldee.  The 
following  '1^,  "an  enemy,"  is  likewise  peculiar 
to  the  pre-targumistic  Chaldee. — Verse  17  [20]. 
The  tree  that  thou  sawest,  which  grew,  and 
was  strong  ;  rather,  "of  which  thou  sawest  that 
it  was  great  and  strong."  The  second  "'1  is  sub- 
ordinated to  the  first  in  ""^T.^  "'l,  and  is  there- 
fore lo  be  rendered  as  a  conjunction,  not  as  a 
relative  i>ronoun  coordinated  with  the  first.  The 
ensuing  description  of  the  tree,  in  vs.  17  and  18 
[20  and  21],  and  likewise  of  the  Divine  sentence 
of  judgment  pronounced  on  it  in  v.  30  [23],  are 
repeated  verbally  from  vs.  Tand  13  [10  and  16], 
although  with  abbreviations  and  unessential  vari- 
ations.—Verse  19  [22].  It  is  thou,  O  king,  that 
art  growrn  and  become  strong,  etc.  ;  i.e.,  "  that 
art  become  great  and  strong."  The  following 
rai   Ijri^a"!^,  etc.,  is  loosely  connected  with  the 

relative  clause  13 1  S"~  '^\  The  Keri  offers  the 
smoother  form  I"?"!  instead  of  v"!?"!'  ^^^  ^  ^^^ 
following,  the  third  pers.  fem.  HCa  instead  of 
rspn  =  rst-a;  cf.  also  v.  21  [34].— Concern- 
ing the  remarkable  addition  by  the  Sept.  to  v. 
19  [32],  cf.,  e.g..  Eth.-fuud.  principles.  No.  3 
[below]. — Verse  21  [24],  This  is  the  interpre- 
tation (of  it),  Oking; — the  conclu.sion  to  the 
lengthy  antecedent  clause,  v.  20  [23]. — And 
this  is  the  decree  of  the  Most  High  which  is 
come  (determined)  upon  my  lord  the  king.  In 
regard  to  b"  S^'J?,  cf.  the  Heb.  Vy  j^^j,  Gen. 
xxxiv.  27 ;  Job  li.  11.  The  preterite  nCQ  re- 
presents the  decree  as  already  decided  on,  and, 
therefore,  as  unavoidable,  and  certain  to  be 
executed  on  the  king. — Verse  23  [2.j].  They 
shall  drive  thee  from  men,  literally,  "  and  thee 
shall  they  drive,"  etc.  The  1  in  '^b']  is  consec- 
utive: "and  thus  shall  they  drive  thee."  The 
impersonal  active  T'll'?  is  exactly  similar  to 
Vy?^,  chap-  iii-  4,  and  infra,  v.  28  [31].  The 
agents  of  the  punishment,  who  are  not  desig- 
nated, are  the  inferior  angels,  as  %vith  V^O"].  v. 

13  [IG],  and  as  in  v.  28  [31].*— Verse  23  [36]. 
And  w^hereas  they  commanded  to  leave  the 
stump  of  the  tree  roots;  "  they  "  —  the  heav- 
enly watchers,  of  whom  one  only  spoke,  vs.  10- 

14  [13-17]  ;  but  that  one,  was  the  representative 
of  the  entire  community  of  angels.  — Thy  king- 
dom shall  (again)  bs  sure  unto  thee,  after  that 
thou  shalt  have  known,  etc.  D'^p  neither  sig- 
nifies "to  continue"  (Theodotion,  Vulg.,  Dere- 

*   [We  prefer  to  say,  with  Keil,  that  "the  indefinite  plur. 
form  '\''Tni3  suinds  instead  of  the  passive,  as  the  following 

TiZ  ^I'aJ:^''  and  "I'lJSiQ,  ct.  under  chap.  iii.  4.      Thus 

the  subject  remains  altogether  indefinite,  and  one  has  nei- 
ther to  think  of  men  who  will  drive  him  from  their  society, 
etc..  nor  of  anfreln.  of  whom  perhaps  the  expulsion  of  the 
king  may  be  predicated,  hut  scarcely  the  feeding  on  grass 
ftod  being  wet  with  dew."] 


ser,  von  Lengerke,  etc.),  nor  "  to  bo  preserved  '' 
(Bertholdt),  but  rather,  "to  arise,  stand,  bo 
firm,"  and  here,  in  view  of  the  context,  "  t'l 
again  be  firm"  (Hitz.,  Kranichf.).  "'""T?  'D 
this  place  is  not  inferenti.^l — "  since,  because," 
— as  in  chap.  iii.  22,  but  instead  relates  to  tin.e, 
"  as  soon  as,"  and  designates  a  juncture  follow- 
ing the  period  included  in  "^1  ~~,  vs.  21,  29  [24, 
32] — hence  at  the  close  of  the  seven  years.— 
That  the  heavens  do  rule,  viz.  :  over  the  king- 
doms of  men,  cf.  vs.  14  [17]  and  23  [2.5].  "  The 
heavens  "  is  here  used  to  designate  God,  instead 
of  "  the  Most  High."  The  expression  must  be 
regarded  as  an  abbreviation  of  the  phrase  "  the 
God  of  heaven,"  which  w.ts  emplo^'ed  on  former 
occasions  (chap.  ii.  18,  37,  44),  or  of  "  the  King 
of  heaven  "  (iv.  34),  which  is  synonymous  with 
the  former,  or  also  of  "the  Lord  of  heaven" 
(v.  23).  There  is  nothing  untheocratic  and 
polytheistic  in  the  expression,  even  though  the 
Chinese  designate  their  god  as  heaven,  and 
though  the  same  usage  prevailed  among  the 
ancient  Persians  (Herod,  i.  131),  the  Greeks 
(Z'l'f  =  Sanscr.  jdus,  "heaven"),  and  the  ^o- 
raan-i  {Deus  ;  Divus,  Jovis,  etc.).  Even  in  the 
New  Testament  the  SaaiAem  ruv  nhpavui'  is  iden- 
tical with  the  -iaai/..  vnv  ^cov.  and  the  Talmud- 
ists  (e.g.,  Jfedaiim,  IX.  10;  X.  12,  etc  ;  Bux- 
torf.  Lex.  C/ttild.,  col.  2440),  as  well  as  the  Jews 
of  a  much  earlier  period  (according  to  Juvenal, 
Sal.,  XIV.  96  et  seq.,  and  Diodorus  in  I'botius, 
BiM. ,  XI;. ),  generally  designated  God  directly  as 
"  heaven,"  indicating  thereby  that  they  attrib- 
uted to  Him  the  sole  dominion  over  the  heav- 
enly world,  and  denied  that  other  gods  were 
associated  with  Him  (cf.  Psa.  cxv.  16). — Verse 
24  [27] .  Wherefore,  O  king,  let  my  counsel  be 
acceptable  unto  thee,  "b,  '•  wherefore,"  as  in 
chap.  ii.  6.  In  regard  to  ~'rr<  cf.  on  chap.  iii. 
32.  The  term  is  here  construed  with  :;,  as  in 
that  passage  and  chap.  vi.  3,  with  D"!^.,  by  which 
the  persuasiveness  of  the  remarks  is  increased 
(cf.  -3  with  ;?,  Ezra  v.  17),  and  by  which  the 
desire  of  Daniel  to  aid  the  king,  if  po.ssible,  in 
averting  the  impending  danger  and  |)unishmeut, 
becomes  more  apparent  than  would  be  the  case 
if  the  more  courteous  phrase  Tj^!2~p  ~Z^  h.id 
been  employed.  From  this  truly  theocratic 
standpoint,  the  prophet  persists  in  holding  it 
possible  to  turn  aside  the  punishment  threatened 
in  the  dream,  similar  to  Isaiah  (xxxviii.  1  etseq.) 
and  Jeremiah  (xviii.  7  et  seq. )  in  analogous  cases ; 
cf.  Joel  ii.  12  et  seq.  ;  Am.  vii.  3,  6  ;  Jouah  iii. 
5  et  seq.;  2  Kings  xx.  1  et  seq.* — And  break 
off  thy  sins  by  righteousness;  rather,  "pur- 
chase thy  deliverance  from  thy  sins,"  etc.  The 
ancient  translators  justlj'  regard  'il"'^n  as  plural ; 
cf.  the  parallel  '^~';l".  The  suffix  in  "'^^n.  in- 
stead of  '^■'^^n,  is  defective,  similar  to  that  in 
^-^"?'^>  chap.  V.  10.  The  word  is  derived  from 
the  Stat,   emphat.  SST.'^n  of  a  singular  "'ipn  (~ 

*  ["  Daniel  knew  nothing  of  a  heathen  Falum,  but  h€ 
knew  that  the  judgments  of  G-id  were  directed  against  men 
according  to  their  conduct,  and  that  punishment  threatened 
could  only  be  averted  by  repentance." — Keil.] 


Lie. 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL 


Heb.  >iVn,  cf-  Olshausen,  Lelirb.,  p.  283).— 
P'B,  properly  *"to  break"  (cf.  Sanscr.  prnk, 
Lat.  frango.  Germ.  brecJien),  designates,  similar 
to  the  Heb.  ~-r  i^  passages  like  P.sa.  cxxxvi. 
24 ;  Sam.  v.  8,  etc..  a  "  tearing  out"  of  a  mat- 
ter from  its  former  position  or  relations,  and 
hence,  a  '"liberating,  redeeming,  or  purchase" 
(uf.  3  Sam.  vii.  23  ;  Isa.  xxxv.  9,  10,  where  pi2 
is  used  for  ;!{3  or  ,-"£,  exsulve-re.  redimcrt).  The 
Sept.  and  Theodot.  therefore  render  it  correctly 
by  '/.i'Tiiuxju/,  the  Vulg.  redime,  and  Syr.,  Saad., 
Ibn-Ezra,  Berth.,  de  Wette,  Hitzig.  etc.,  in  a 
similar  manner.  On  the  other  hand,  Rashi, 
Geier,  Starke,  Dereser,  Hiivernick,  von  Len- 
gerke.  Kranichfeld,  etc.,  prefer  the  idea  of  cast- 
ing off,  casting  away,  as  it  is  found  in  Gen. 
xxxvii.  40,  and  accordingly  interpret :  "  lay  off 
thy  sins"  (Hiiv.).  or  "break  off  thy  sins,  give 
them  up "  (Kranichfeld).  But  in  the  usage  of 
the  Chaldee  language,  and  especially  in  that  of 
the  Targums,  p-2  constantly  and  undeniably 
bears  the  sense  of  redeeming  by  purchase  [e.g., 
a  birthright,  a  field,  the  daughter  of  Jephthah, 
Judg.  xi.  3.5) ;  and  the  rather  broad  conception, 
admitting,  as  it  does,  of  an  application  to  many 
and  diverse  relations,  by  no  means  requires  that 
the  object  to  be  redeemed  should  be  desirable  to 
the  purchaser,  and  possess  value  for  him.  Ra- 
ther, the  remark  of  von  Hofmann  {Sc/iriftbeweis, 
I.  h\9)  is  correct :  "  The  sins  are  not  under  re- 
straint, but,  instead,  they  enslave.  The  idea  of 
D.aniel,  therefore,  is  that  the  king  should  deliver 
himself  from  the  sins  that  involve  him  in  guilt 
and  slavery,  by  practising  righteousness  and 
mercy  for  the  future,  instead  of  persisting  in 
tlie  arbitrary  and  tyrannical  course  to  which  he 
had  hitherto  been  addicted."  *  Cf.  Melancthon 
al.-fo.  in  the  Apology  (Art.  III.,  p.  112),  where 
the  "  redime  "  of  the  Vulgate  is  retained,  but 
the  supposed  interpretation  is  decidedly  rejected. 
a.s  favoring  the  doctrines  of  work-righteousness 
insisted  on  by  the  Jewish  and  Roman  Catholic 
exegesis  (see  Eth.-fund.  principles,  etc.,  No.  2 
I  below]).  This  interpretation,  however,  does 
not  result  from  any  possible  rendering  of  the 
imper.  ~~2.  but  from  the  incorrect  explanation 
of  ~P,"!^  by  '■  doing  good,  alms,"  which  is  found 
in  numerous  expositors,  from  Jerome  to  Hitzig  ; 
and  the  latter  rendering  is  not  justified,  either 
by  Psa.  xxxvii.  21,  nor  by  a  comparison  with 
extravagant  laudations  of  works  of  mercy  in 
Ecclus.  iii.  28 ;  x-xix.  12  ;  Tob.  iv.  10;  xii  9,  etc. 
The  only  interpretation  of  "P^"]?  allowed  by  the 
context  and  general  usage  is  "  righteous  deport- 
ment "  to  be  observed  by  the  king  toward  his 


*  [This  interi)retation  of  j3*ir,  however,  is  hardly  Rstis- 
fuctory,  for,  as  lieil  iirgea,  it  "means  to  break  oil,  to  break 
'1  pieces,  hence  to  separate,  to  disjoin,  to  put  at  a  distance, 
see  under  Gen,  :cxi.  40.  And  though  in  the  Targums  p'lD 
Is  used  for  ifcty,  "^B,  to  loosen,  to  unbend,  of  redeeming, 

ransoming  the  iirst-bom.  an  inheritance,  or  any  other  valn- 
alile  powiession,  yet  this  use  of  the  word  by  no  means  accords 
with  Hint  &^  the  object,  because  sins  are  not  (joods  which 
one  redeems  or  ransoms  so  as  to  retain  them  for  his  own 
use."  Kosenmiiller  I.kewise  notes  ihis  incon;a"uity.  and  ad- 
duces Exod.  xxxii.  2.  as  an  instance,  v  here  On'.:c!os  retains 
the  word  in  the  sense  of  breaking  off  (the earrings).  He 
•ven  declares  that  "  Cbaldee  writers  employ  pIS  simply  for 
laying  tuitU  as  in  Num.  i.  51.^] 


subjects,  In  contrast  with  his  former  tyrannj 
and  arbitrary  domination.  In  the  parallel  mem- 
ber, "mercy  toward  the  poor"  is  intimately 
connected  with  this,  as  being  the  second  leading 
virtue  in  rulers,  which  virtue  the  king  is  ex- 
horted to  cultivate  (cf .  Hofm. ,  as  above).  The 
historical  situation,  rather  than  the  usage,  indi- 
cates that,  in  connection  herewith,  the  VT"; 
are  to  be  sought  for  principally  in  the  number  of 
the  poor  Israelites,  the  theocraticaUy  wretched 
'C"":?),  who  were  languishing  in  exile  and  cap- 
tivity. The  usage  would  admit  of  a  different 
rendering  of  the  y",-  *—^  it  may  be  a  length- 
ening of  thy  tranquility  f  rather,  "  if  thy  pros- 
perity shall  be  durable."  This  is  the  external 
motive  addressed  to  the  king,  to  induce  him  to 
heed  the  warning  of  the  theocratic  seer.  The 
conditional  language  is  very  decided  ;  "1",  "if," 
is  no  more  to  be  taken  in  the  dubious  sense  of 
ei  u,m  (Acts  viii.  22)  in  this  passage  than  in  chap, 
iii.  17. — sa-iS*  is  not  "forbearance,  forgiveness," 
but  "  duration,  continuance  ;  "  cf.  Jer.  xv.  15  ; 
Ecc.  viii    12. 

Verses  2.')-30  [2»-33].  T/ie  fulfilment.  AU 
this  came  upon  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar. 
Havernick  regards  these  words  as  still  belong- 
ing to  the  royal  proclamation,  while  all  that  fol- 
lows, to  V.  30  [33],  is  a  parenthesis  inserted  by 
the  prophet  (see  supra,  on  chap.  iii.  31).  But 
this  hypothesis  renders  it  impossible  to  obserie 
unity  of  the  report,  which  must  obviou.sly  be 
preserved,  since  the  theocratic  coloring  appar- 
ent in  these  verses  may  elsewhere  be  frequently 
noticed  (supra),  and  since  a  detailed  statement 
of  the  infliction  of  the  threatened  punishment 
is  required  in  order  to  give  point  to  the  report. 
This  does  not  make  it  inconceivable  that  Daniel, 
the  writer  of  the  report  as  a  whole,  should  in 
this  coimection  relegate  the  royal  subject,  who 
had  hitherto  been  spoken  of  in  the  first  person, 
to  the  background,  and  that  he  should  describe 
the  Divine  judgment  executed  on  the  kin.i:  from 
his  own  theocratic  point  of  view,  f— Verse  26 

♦  [Daniel  prudently  alludes  to  the  king's  moral  obliquitieg 
only  in  general  terms.  Impiety  wits  doubtless  his  most 
heinous  offence  (see  verses  27  pJO],  37  [40],  and  compare 
chap.  V.  22,  S3),  and  it  was  indeed  his  failure  to  remember 
Jehovah,  whom  he  had  once  been  brought  to  recognise 
(chap.  ill.  28),  that  bred  and  fostered  his  heaven-insulting 
arrogance.  Yet  Daniel  doubtless  hinted  al^o  at  some  special 
sin^  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  a  wilful  desjiot.  Stuitrt  thinks 
'■  he  means  to  de.si'-'nate  his  capricious  and  tyrannical  be- 
havior on  some  occasions  when  he  fell  into  a  rage ;  perhaps 
also  to  remind  him  of  the  heavy  hand  that  pressed  on  all 
the  captives  whom  he  had  led  intoe.xile  "  nnd  still  retained. 
This  last  seems  especially  probable  from  the  particulars 
specified  immediately.] 

t  [Keil  thus  aptly  refutes  the  view  of  Bertholdt.  Hitzig, 
and  others,  who  "  find  here  that  the  author  falls  out  of 
the  role  of  the  king  into  the  narrative  tone.  ?.nd  thus  be- 
trays the  fact  that  some  other  than  the  king  framed  the 
edict.  But  this  conclusion  is  opposed  by  the  fact  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  from  ver.  81  [34]  speaks  of  his  recovery 
again  in  the  first  person.  Ttius  it  is  beyond  doubt  that 
the  change  of  person  has  its  rea.son  in  the  matter  itself. 
Certainly  it  could  not  be  that  in  this  Nebnchadiiczzar  thought 
it  unbecoming  to  speak  in  his  own  person  of  his  madness; 
for.  if  he  had  had  so  tender  a  regard  for  his  own  person, 
he  would  not  have  published  the  whole  occurrence  in  a 
m.anifcsto  addressed  to  his  subjects.  Eut  the  reason  of  hii 
speaking  of  his  madness  in  the  third  person,  as  if  sonic 
other  one  were  narrating  it,  lies  simply  in  thi.s  that  ic 
that  condition  he  was  not  Icli  =  Ego  (Kliefotli).  With  thf 
return  of  the  Irh,  T,  nn  his  recovery  from  his  madness 
Nebuchadnezzar  begins  again  to  narrate  in  the  first  pe' 
son."] 


CHAP.  IIL  31-rV.  34 


in 


)2fl].  At  the  end  of  twelve  months  he  walked 
upon  (marg. )  the  palace  of  the  kingdom  of 
Babylon;  rather,  "the  royal  palace  at  Baby- 
lon." In  relation  to  the  time  mdisated,  "  at  the 
end  of  twelve  months,"  Kranichfeld  observes : 
"  WTien  the  important  incident  of  the  dream  was 
a  year  old,  and  on  that  account  its  recollection 
naturally  exercised  the  imagination  of  the  king 
with  special  force,  he  gave  himself  up,  despite 
the  Divine  warning,  to  the  proudest  exaltation 
of  self,  which  indicated  that  he  was  neither  con- 
trolled by  religious  piety  in  general,  nor  by  rev- 
erence for  the  God  of  the  Jews  in  particular." 
■itc.  It  appears  to  us  that  this  is  seeking  too 
much  in  that  designation  of  time.  It  is  simply 
a  historical  circumstance  that  exactly  twelve 
months  elapsed  between  the  dream  and  its  ful- 
filment, and  at  the  same  time  an  illustration  of 
the  simple  accuracy  and  concrete  truth  of  the 
narrative.*  —  "Upon  the  royal  palace,"  i.e.. 
upon  its  flat  roof;  cf.  2  Sam.  xi.  2.  The  proud 
king,  who  has  employed  the  respite  of  twelve 
months  in  cursing  his  tyrannical  supercUious- 
ness,  instead  of  improving  it  by  repenting  and 
working  righteousness,  wishes,  by  actual  obser- 
vation from  this  elevated  spot,  to  assure  him- 
self of  the  condition  of  his  royal  power,  and  to 
feast  himself  with  looking  on  the  gigantic  metrop- 
olis of  the  world  which  he  h.ad  created.  His 
thoughts  are  similar  to  those  of  another,  in 
Schiller's  OLockc  (the  Bell) : 

"The  splendor  of  the  house 
Stands  firm  as  earth's  foundations 
Against  the  power  of  evil,"  etc. 

The  "  walking  along"  (Xin  '^bna  ;  cf.  T"^'"n 
m33,  v.  34  [37])  likewise  indicates  his  conceited 
arrogance  and  pride  ;  cf.  the  Germ.  "  dnherstol- 
lireii"  (strutting  along). — The  mention  of  the 
location,  "at  Babylon,"  does  not  at  all  compel 
the  assumption  of  a  Palestinian  origin  of  the 
book,  or  of  any  particular  part  of  it,  as  even 
Hitzig  acknowledges.  It  merely  indicates  that 
the  author  was  not  a  constant  resident  in  the 
cit;/  of  Babylon,  and  that  his  narrative  was  com- 
posed for  readers  who  were  chiefly,  or  without 
exception,  strangers  in  Babylon  (however  long 
they  might  have  been  detained  in  that  city 
against  their  will  I.  These  features  are  suited 
to  the  view  that  Daniel  was  the  writer  of  the 
document  before  us,  as  thoroughly  as  theymili- 
tate  against  the  idea  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
its  immediate  author ;  cf.  supra,  on  chap.  iii. 
31.  f— Verse  27  [:J01.  Is  not  this  (the)  great 
Babylon  that  I  have  built,  etc.  "  The  great " 
(sri"])  was  evidently  a  standing  title  of  Baby- 
lon, with  its  circumference  of  480  stadia  (Herod. 


•  [Keil  will  have  it  that  "  ~'^V  here  means  not  .Mmply 

to  befiiu  to  speak,  but,  properly,  to  anxwer,  and  suggests 
to  us  a  foregoing  colloquy  of  the  king  with  himself  in  his 
own  mind  "  He  prudently  refrains,  however,  from  infer- 
ring that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  thinking  of  the  very  dream 
in  question  at  the  time.] 

t  (Rather,  as  Keil  suggests.  "  the  addition  at  Babylon 
does  not  indicate  that  tlie  king  was  then  living  at  a  dis- 
tance from  Cubyloii.  as  Berth.,  von  Leng.,  Maurer,  and 
others  imagine,  but  is  altogether  suitable  to  the  matter, 
becinse  Nebuchadnezzar  certainly  had  palaces  outside  of 
Babylon  ;  Ljut  it  is  made  with  reference  to  the  language 
of  the  king  whicl'.  follows  regarding  the  greatness  of  liaby- 
lon."l 


i.  191),  its  colossal  walls,  its  2.5  gates  on  either 
side  of  the  immense  square,  its  076  districts 
filled  with  houses  of  several  stories  each,  its 
hanging  gardens  on  the  Euphrates,  its  gigantic 
temples  and  palaces,  etc.  Cf.  Herod.,  1.  c.  ; 
Diodor.  ii.  5  et  seq.  ;  Aristotle's  P'/lit.,  III.  2; 
PhUostratus,  i.  18  ;  Curtius,  VI.  1  et  seq.  ;  also 
Starke's  Synopsis  on  this  passage  ;  Wattenbach, 
Nineve  und  Bubylon  (Heidelberg.  1868);  and 
Alfred  Maury,  Niiieve  et  Bnbylone,  in  the  Rente 
des  deux  Moiides,  1868,  March  1-5,  p.  470  ss.  ; 
[also  Rawlinson's  Five  Ancient  Monarchies.  I. 
510  et  seq.].  For  th^  reason  many  other  au- 
thors apply  the  predicate  t)  iuyn?.r]  to  that  city  ; 
e.  g.,  the  Apocalyptist  John,  Rev.  xiv.  8 ;  xvi. 
19  (cf.  also  Isa.  xui.  19 ;  xiv.  4  ;  xlvii.  3,  4) ; 
and  Strabo  (L  xvi.),  who  applies  to  it  the  stanza  : 
ipijfiia  iie-ja/.ii  car'iv  i]  jitya'/.i}  To/.(f,  cf.  Pausanius, 
Arcad.,  p.  509,  who  describes  Babylon  as  a  city 
7/i'Tna  eide  TO/.fw  rdv  rore  ue}iGrT^'  r/Aior.  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's Babylon  might  certainly  be  desig- 
nated as  "  the  great  city  "  with  as  much  pro- 
priety as  formerly  Nineveh  (cf.  Gen.  x.  11,  12  ; 
Jonah  i.  2 ;  iii.  2  ;  iv.  11),  and  far  more  justly 
than,  e.g.,  Hamath  (see  Amos  vi.  2;  nan  PJin), 
or  Diospolis  (Amff-o/./f  //  iieyii/.i/,  Insor.  4717),  or 
Ephesu.s,  Smyrna,  Pergamos,  Nicomedia,  and 
other  cities  of  a  later  period  in  Asia  Minor  (of. 
Rheinwald,  Komment.  znm  Br.  an  die  Philippir, 
p.  3  et  seq. ). — That  I  have  built  for  the  house 
(or  seat)  of  the  kingdom.  The  A.  V.  is  literal. 
The  expression  is  equivalent,  in  modem  idiom, 
to  "  the  royal  capital  and  seat  of  government." 
The  ^3;^  of  the  whole  empire  was  to  have  its 
seat,  its  residence,  in  that  metropolis  ( Kranichf .). 
Cf.  the  reference  to  Bethel  as  a  nab'^': ,  in  Am. 
vii.  13.  "  That  I  have  built ;  "  i.e.,  that  I  have 
developed  and  completed.  On  Kta,  otherwise 
n:3,  n  this  signification,  cf.  2  Kings  xiv.  22  ;  2 
Chron.  xi.  5,  6 ;  and  see  the  Chalda;an  histori- 
.ans  Berosus,  Abydenus,  and  Megasthenes,  in 
Josephus.  Ant..  X.  11,  1  ;  c.  Apion,  I.  19  ;  and 
in  Eusebius,  Chron.,  I.  59,  with  reference  to  the 
numerous  edifices  erected  in  Babylon  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar; also  Bochart,  Phnleg.  p.  263  et  seq., 
where  Nebuchadnezzar's  services  in  beautifying 
the  city  and  increasing  its  architectural  great- 
ness are  compared  with  those  of  Augustus  in 
Rome,  which  justified  his  well-known  remark, 
",«(!  marmorcmn  relinquere,  qunm  lateritiam  nc- 
cepisset"  (Suetonius,  Aug.,  c.  29).* — For  the 
honor  of  my  majesty ;  ^']'^_!^  "'P"'r  ;  cf.  the 
similar  constructions  in  Deut.  v.  33,  17  ;  Zech. 
xi.  13  ;  and  with  reference  to  the  preceding  ex- 
pression, "  by  the  might  of  ray  power,"  cf.  pas- 
sages like  Isa.  xl.  26;  Eph.  i.  19;  Col.  i.  11, 
etc. — Verse  28  [31].  Wh'le  ths  word  ivas  in 
the  king's  mouth.  The  Divine  punishment  fol- 
lows closely  after  the  vain  and  presumptuous 
exclamation  (cf.  Isa.  xxviii.  4)  ;  exactly  as  in 
the  poem  by  Schiller  quoted  above,  where  it  if 
added  : 


♦  [Abundant  confirmation  has  been  founf'  of  these  en- 
largements and  reconstructions  of  the  edifices  nf  Babylon 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  excivations  carried  on  there  by 
Botto,  I.ayard,  and  others.  Most  of  the  anciert  brick-*  are 
stamped  with  the  name  of  that  monarch.  Sec  Rawlinson'i 
UtroUnlm,  I.  412  (Am.  e.l.).l 


118 


THE  PROPHET  DAJflEL. 


"  For  no  eternal  bond  can  be 
With  the  fates  that  rule  out   destiny, 
And  misfortune's  pace  is  swift.'' — 

There  fell  a  voice  from  heaven.  Observe  the 
agreement  bet.veen  the  prophetic  description  in 
the  dream,  vs.  10  [13J  and  11  [14].  and  the  ful- 
filment twelve  months  later.      The  words  rn: 

**: -r  T?,  which  are  employed  in  the  former 
passag-e,  are  here  echoed  by  b?:  (cf.  Isa.  ix.  7), 
which  still  more  strongly  emphasizes  the  sud- 
denness with  which  the  judicial  sentence  is 
promulgated  ;  and  S^H?  ^~P,  in  that  place  is 
here  repeated  by  the  characteristic  bjT,  which 
recalls  the  analogies  in  Deut.  iv.  33,  36  ;  Matt, 
iii.  17;  John  xii.  28;  Acts  ix.  4;  x.  13,  etc. 
The  record,  although  sufficiently  circumstantial, 
is  but  a  summary,  and  affords  no  trustworthy 
indications  to  show  whether  this  oua'?)  t^  nhpavov 
was  produced  by  the  mediation  of  psychologi- 
cal or  of  physical  causes.  The  leading  fact  to 
be  observed  is  merely  that  the  powerfully  excited 
king  was  compelled  to  recollect  the  warning 
formerly  conveyed  in  the  dream,  by  what  he 
now  heard,  whether  by  a  purely  subjective  mode 
of  perception,  or  whether  objective  agencies 
were  at  the  same  time  employed. — O  king  Neb- 
uchadnezzar, to  thee  it  is  spoken;  The 
kingdom  is  departed  from  thee.  The  perf. 
r~l'  is  employed,  because  he  who  was  degraded 
to  the  level  of  the  brute  by  the  most  fearful  of 
mental  maladies,  was  at  once  and  directly  in- 
cajiacitated  for  his  position  and  office  as  ruler  as 
a  matter  of  course.  In  regard  to  'l'''l?2S,  "  they 
say."  see  on  v,  23  [2.5]  ;  concerning  v.  39  [83] 
see  ibid.,  and  on  v.  14  [17].— Verse  30  [33]  The 
same  hour  (hence  immediately  ;  cf.  on  chap. 
iii.  0)  ■was  the  thing  (or  word)  fulfilled  upon 
Nebuchadnezzar,  ~C3,  literally,  "  came  to 
end  ; "  for  the  end  of  a  prophecy  is  its  coming 
to  pass,  by  which  it  ceases  to  be  prophecy  (Hit- 
zig) ;  cf.  n^-.  chap.  xii.  7;  Ezra  i.  1.  etc. — Con- 
cerning the  lycanthropy  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  see 
Introd. ,  §  8,  note  1,  and  the  literature  there 
adduced. — Till  his  hairs  ■were  grown  like 
eagles'  feathers,  and  his  nails  like  birds' 
claws;  literally,  "like  eagles — like  birds" 
<'^^";c:2 — T^TD^S),  a  comparntio  mynpendiaria-, 
with  which  the  Stat,  const,  after  the  particle 
of  comparison  has  been  omitted,  as  with  T?  in 
v.  13  [16],  and  as  in  Isa.  ix.  3;  Joshua  v.  36, 
and  also  in  the  classics  (e.g.,  11.,  17,  h\  ;  Juve- 
ual,  Sat.  4.  71.  etc.). 

Verses  31-34  [34-37].  The  restoration  of  Ne- 
hnchiHlnezznr.  nnd  his  ascription  of  praise  to  God. 
And  (rather  "but")  at  the  end  of  the  days, 
i.e.,  of  the  period  of  seven  years,  vs.  13,  32,  29 
[10,  2.5.  32]. — I  ....  lifted  up  mine  eyes 
unto  heaven,  namely,  as  seeking  help  from 
thence,  as  supplicating  the  God  of  heaven  (see 
on  V.  23  [26]  ;  cf.  Psa.  cxxiii.  1  et  seq.  ;  xxv.  5, 
etc.  * — And  mine  understanding  returned  unto 
me;  or,  taking  the  t  as  illative,  "  so  that  mine 

*  [This  raising  of  his  eyes  to  heaven  was  "  the  6r-t 
piini  of  the  return  of  human  consciousness :  from  which, 
however,  we  are  n-tt  to  conclude,  with  Hit?.ig,  that  before 
this,  in  UiB  madness,  he  went  on  all-fours  like  an  ox," — 
Keil.\ 


underst.inding  returned."  The  prayer  of  tht 
hitherto  maniac  king  was  thus  shown  to  be  any- 
thing rather  than  a  "flagrant  inconsequence,' 
as  Von  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  and  others  character- 
ize it.  On  the  contrary,  it  produced  the  bene 
ficial  effect  of  delivering  the  penitent  king  from 
his  disease,  and  of  restoring  him  to  the  society 
and  the  mode  of  life  of  civilized  people.  Cf. 
Pusey  and  Kranichteld  on  this  passijge,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  inclination  lo  prayer,  or  to  other 
religious  manifestations  and  observances,  which 
has  frequently  been  observed  in  the  case  of 
maniacs  afflicted  with  lycanthropy.  In  the  case 
before  us,  where  the  period  ot  insanity  and  pun- 
ishment imposed  by  God  had,  at  any  rate,  ex- 
pired, the  prayerful  looking  up  to  heaven  by 
the  humbled  king  could  not  possibly  result  in 
less  than  the  elevation  of  the  sufferer  from  his 
brutal  condition  to  manhood — from  the  state  of 
one  lying  helplessly  on  the  ground,  and  looking 
earthward  in  his  debasement,  to  the  dignity  and 
bearing  of  man,  who  is  formed  in  the  image  of 
God,  that  is  to  say,  to  the  normal  form  of  man, 
of  which  Ovid  sings  (Metnm.,  I.  85  ss.)  : 

"  Pronaque  ciini  apectent  animalia  ccetera  terram 
Ofi  homini  sjtbtime  dedit,  cifhtmqlce  videre 
Jtts-Ht,  et  ererton  ad  sidera  toUere  viiUu't.'^ — 

And  I  praised  and  honored  him  that  liveth 
forever.  Cf.  vi.  27 ;  xii.  7 ;  and  also,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  latter  half  of  the  verse,  chap.  iii.  33. 
["  The  first  thought  he  entertained  was  to  thank 
God,  to  praise  him  as  the  ever-Uving  One,  and 
to  recognize  the  eternity  of  His  sway.  Nebu- 
chadnezzar acknowledges  and  praises  God  as  the 
'  ever-living  One,'  because  He  had  again  given 
to  him  his  life,  which  had  been  lo.st  in  his  mad- 
ness."— Keil] — Verse  32  [35].  And  all  the  in- 
habitants of  the  earth  are  (to  be)  reputed  as 
nothing,  that  is,  "  in  comparison  to  Him."  The 
partic.  Vr'"'?'?!  must  be  regarded  in  this  place 
as  the  part.  fut.  pass.,  and  is  not,  therefore,  to 
be  explained  (in  analogy  with  Isa.  xl.  17)  by, 
"are  reputed  .as  nothing  by  Him"  (Havem., 
Kranichf.,  etc.).  ["  The  eternity  of  the  suprera 
acy  of  God  includes  His  omnipotence  as  opposetl 
to  the  weakness  of  the  inhabitants  of  earth  " 
(Keil).]  ~-3  instead  of  ''bs  may  be  regarded 
as  the  error  of  a  copyist,  who  thought  to  correct 
a  supposed  »b3  (that  is,  t*?"!*)  by  substituting 
nbS.  Oi  "  '13  for  'tb,  is  an  archaism,  conform- 
ing to  the  pregnant  character  of  the  negation, 
similar  to  n';  for  s<3,  Deut.  iii.  11  "  (Kranichf.). 
[The  final  ,i  seems  to  be  a  mere  Chaldaic  inter- 
change for  i<  in  the  ordinary  5*-3,  as  not.]  The 
rabbinical  assertion,  found  in  Rashi  and  Saadia, 
that  nb  signifies  "  an  atom  of  solar  dust,"  is  at 
all  events  to  be  rejected. —And  he  doeth  accord- 
ing to  his  vrill  in  the  army  of  heaven,  etc. 
Cf.  Isa.  xxiv.  21,  a  passage  that  evidently  lies 
at  the  foundation  of  the  one  before  us,  in  ■which 
"  the  host  on  high  "  presents  the  same  idea  as  is 
contained  in  "the  army  of  heaven"  in  this 
place.  Both  refer  to  the  innumerable  compa- 
nies of  angels  who  inhabit  heaven  (Gen.  xxxii 
2  et  seq.  ;  Heb.  xii.  23  et  seq.  ;  cf.  Dan.  ■i-ii. 
10).— And  none  can  ....  say  unto  him, 
what  doest  thou?  Cf.  Isa.  xliii.  13;  and  in 
relation  to  the  phrase,  "  to  stay  one's  hand  — 


CHAP.  ni.  31 -IV.  34. 


119 


to  oppose  him."  see  the  Targ.  on  Eocles.  viii. 

4;  Tt.  Sanhtdr.,  c.  2  ;  also  the  Arabic  of  Hariri, 
p.  444.* — Verse  33  [30].  And  the  glory  of  my 
kingdom,  mine  honor,  and  my  brightness  re- 
turned unto  me.  The  3  before  "ip"  serves  to 
introduce  that  word  as  a  new  subject,  after  the 
former,  "'""r'r  (of.  Isa.  xxxii.  1  ;  xrxviii.  16  ; 
P.sa.  bc.xxix.  19).  "P."!,  "station,  majesty,  dig- 
nity," such  as  is  manifested  in  the  look,  bear- 
ing, and  manners  of  a  princely  personage,  "n.^" 
■•splendor."  A.  V.  '•  honor  "(cf.  v.  27  [30]; 
chap.  V.  I'Si,  is  here  contrasted  with  his  former 
appearance  and  condition,  which  denied  his 
royal  state,  and  even  his  nature  as  a  man,  v.  30 
[33].  T^'  is  properly  "brightness,"  and  here 
refers  to  the  beauty  or  beaming  freshness  of  the 
human  countenance  (cf.  chap.  v.  6,  9  ;  vii.  28), 
while  1-in  refers  more  particularl_v  to  the  splen- 
dor of  his  robe.s  (cf.  Psa.  ex.  3  ;  xxix.  2  ;  xcvi.  9  ; 
2  Chron.  xx.  21 ). — And  my  counsellors  and  my 
lords  sought  unto  me, — they,  %%'ho  had  formerly 
avoided  and  deserted  me  !  That  ^<"  2  signifies 
a  search  for  one  who  is  believed  to  have  disap- 
peared without  leaving  a  trace  by  which  to  dis- 
cover him,  is  an  assumption  mode  by  Hitzig  and 
also  by  a  number  of  earlier  expositors,  such  as 
Geier,  Jlichaelis,  Berthoklt,  etc.,  which,  how- 
ever, is  without  any  support  whatever.  The 
expression  rather  designates  "  a  seirrch  conduc- 
ing to  the  honor  of  the  king,  which  was  insti- 
tuted by  his  former  counsellors  and  magnates 
in  their  capacity  as  the  council  of  the  regency 
during  the  interim,  for  the  purpose  of  oiBcially 
requesting  the  king  on  his  restoration  to  health, 
to  resume  the  control  of  the  government."  The 
terms  i^',!""  (see  on  iii.  24)  and  ■\-':2-i:i  do 
not,  however,  designate  different  subjects,  but 
the  same  ones  with  reference  to  their  several 
powers  and  dignities  ;  cf.  bi~3T  "lb,  3  Sam.  iii. 
2S  ;  u.';t!c  mi  i)rvar77rir,  Job.  ix.  23. — And  I  was 
(again)  established  in  my  kingdom.  CfP"'^ 
instead  of  ~,-P~'j.  because  of  the  following  iic- 
crnt.  diritinct. — And  excellent  majesty  was 
added  u  ito  me  ;  '■  I  received  still  greater  pow- 
er" than  I  had  formerly  enjoyed;  cf.  Job  xlii. 
10.  There  are  no  historical  authorities  to  show 
in  what  the  additional  power  consisted  which 
came  to  Xebuchadnezzar  toward  the  end  of  his 
life  ;  but  the  truth  of  this  statement  cannot  on 
that  account  be  questioned. — Verse  34  [37 j. 
Now  (or  therefore)  I,  Nebuchadnezzar,  praise, 
and  extal,  and  honor,  etc.  By  this  doxology 
the  close  of  the  ro.yal  proclamation  returns  to 
the  thought  of  the  introduction,  chap.  iii.  32  et 
seq. — All  whose  (rather,  "  for  all  His  ")  works 


are  truth,  and  his  ways  judgment. 


Sir 


Hi 


lit- 


erally "firmness,  immutability,"  and  hence, 
"  faithfulness,  truth  "  (=r  Heb.  n?K).  I'^l,  lit- 
erally "judgment."  procedure  strictly  con- 
formed to  justice  (=  Heb.  ^2"f:^) ;  cf.  Jer.  ix. 
23  ;  xxii.  1 3.  — And  those  that  walk  in  pride, 

*   [rT"'^n    KH"^   in  the  Pael,  t<f  atrike  on  the  hand,  to 

hinder.  U  derived  from  the  cu^tcm  of  striking  children  on 
the  hiind  in  cha.stlsemeut  (Keilj,  or  iu  order  to  cheek  them 
from  a  proceeding.] 


he  is  able  to  abase.  Cf.  Isa.  x.  33;  xiii.  11 ; 
XXV.  11;  1  Sam.  ii.  7  ;  Psa.  xviii.  28  ;  Luke  i. 
51  et  seq. — In  relation  to  the  enlargement  of 
this  doxology  of  Nebuchadnezzar  which  is  found 
in  the  Sept.  in  this  place,  see  the  Eth.-fund 
principles,  etc.,  No.  3  [below]. 

ETHICO-FUNDAMEXTAL  PRIN'CIPLES  RELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLO- 
OETICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETICAL 
SUGGESTIONS. 

According  to  the  remarks  on  chap.  iii.  31  [iv. 
1],  the  authorship  of  this  section  is  divided  be- 
tween Nebuchadnezzar  and  Daniel,  with  the  dis- 
tinction that  the  former  is  conceived  as  the 
moral  originator  and  ordainer  of  the  edict,  while 
the  latter  is  its  writer.  But,  at  the  same  time, 
both  the  heathen  king  and  the  theocratic  pro- 
phet are  so  exclusively  the  active  (or  suifering) 
characters  of  the  narrative,  that  every  observa- 
tion of  dogmatic  or  apologetical  importance 
must  be  derived  from  the  conduct  of  one  or  the 
other  of  these  two  persons.  We  therefore  direct 
our  attention 

1.  To  Xe.huclutdnezznr,  —  with  reference  to 
whose  seizure  by  lycanthropic  mania,  as  being 
credible  on  general  grounds,  and  also  as  being 
attested  by  extra-biblical  authorities,  the  neces- 
sary explanation  has  been  given  in  the  Introd. 
(^  8,  note  1).  We  now  direct  attention  to  the 
act  of  profound  self-abasement  which  the  king 
performed  by  publishing,  of  his  own  impulse,  a 
report  respecting  his  protracted  disease  of  sev- 
eral years'  duration,  and  also  respecting  its  causes 
and  his  final  cure.  This  involves  no  improba- 
bility on  psychological,  political,  or  religious 
grounds.  (1.)  From  a  payckohf/iciil  point  of 
view,  the  report  became  nece.ssar3',  because-  a 
spirit  of  repentance  and  of  sincere  self-abase- 
ment had  really  come  over  the  proud  monarch, 
and  because  he  had  been  led  to  recognize  with 
all  emphasis  that  the  humiliation,  as  wearisome 
as  it  was  deeply  painful  to  his  consciousness, 
was  a  righteous  punishment  inflicted  on  him  by 
the  only  tnie  God,  even  though  a  genuine,  dura- 
ble, and  fruit-bearing  conversion  might  not  have 
been  accomplished  in  his  case.  On  the  nature 
of  this  sincere  and  profoundly  realized  humilia 
tion  of  the  king,  which,  however,  was  inadequate 
to  secure  his  admission  to  a  gracious  state,  or  to 
formal  membership  in  the  congregation  of  God's 
people  under  the  Old  Covenant,  cf.  Calvin  on 
chap.  iv.  34:  "  Hic  est  modun  omiii.i  liumiliii- 
tionU  ;  .led  cnreret  profectu.  ilia  JiumiUntio,  nial 
Dnmiiiu.i po.<itea  rcgeret  iios  /tjnntit  mimsmetixdiui.i. 
Et  ita  Nebxcadiieznr  hic  non  complectitur  grntium 
Dei,  qu(B  tamen  digna  erat  non  vulgiiri  clogio  et 
prcediontione ;  sed  non  descripnit  etinm  in  hoc 
edicto  quicqnid  posset  requiri  ab  homine  pio  et  qui 
edoctua  fucrit  din  in  schola  Dei,  sed  tamen  osten- 
dit  se  multurn  profecisae  sub  Dei  ferulis,  quum 
tribuit  itti  suminam  potentiam  (c.  iii.  32,  33 ;  0. 
iv.  31  ss.),  dcinde  coujungit  justitiit  laudem  ei 
rectitiidinis  (c.  iv.  Zi)  et  sesc  interea  fatetur  reum 
et  testatur  juslam  fui-t-ie  pcxnam,  quas  dii)initui 
irrogata  fuit." — (2.)  In  a  political  aspect,  also, 
the  edict  became  necessary,  since,  as  appears 
from  V.  33,  circumstances  required  that  at  the 
end  of  the  king's  illness  a  proclamation  should 
be  issued,  certifying  that  the  monarch  in  person 


;20 


THE  PEOPHET  DAIsIEL. 


was  about  to  resume  the  government,  and  to 
supersede  the  regency  of  the  interim,  composed 
of  his  '■  counsellors  and  lords,"  who  had  hitherto 
administered  the  aifairs  of  the  state.  The  king 
bad  no  need  to  dread  the  effect  of  such  an  ex- 
planation on  his  people,  even  though  it  involved 
much  that  was  humiliating  to  him  ;  but  it  is  by 
no  means  recorded  that  he  caused  it  to  be  pro- 
mulgated in  the  public  places  and  on  the  streets 
by  the  lips  of  a  herald  (as  was  the  case  with 
tie  edict  in  chap.  iii.  4  et  seq. ),  nor  even  that  it 
was  at  any  time  brought  into  public  notice  in 
writing.  (S. )  Finally,  the  document  involves 
no  considerable  difficulty  in  a  religious  point  of 
view,  inasmuch  as  the  partly  heathen  and  partly 
Israelitish  faith  of  the  IJabylonian  king,  in  other 
words,  that  syncretism  which  amalgamated  all 
religions,  and  which  so  frequently  appears  in  the 
history  of  the  rulers  of  the  period  of  the  captiv- 
ity, is  clearly  manifested,  as  has  already  been 
shown  on  chap.  iii.  31  [iv.  1],  Accordinglj', 
even  Hitzig  fitids  it  to  be  entirely  credible  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  as  a  newly  or  only  partially 
converted  person  should  "  acknowledge  a  god 
as  his  god  (v.  5),  and  even  other  holy  gods  (vs. 
6,  15),  in  addition  to  the  Highest  God."  The 
Btatement  by  the  same  critic  that  it  is  strange 
that  "  after  this  stern  experience  Nebuchad- 
nezzar should  not  have  liberated  the  Jews,  the 
captive  servants  of  the  Highest  God,  as  the 
history  shows  he  did  not,"  is  without  any  foun- 
dation ;  for,  according  to  chap.  iv.  1  compared 
with  vs.  27  and  31,  the  event  did  not  transpire 
until  near  the  close  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign, 
ami  we  cannot  tell  what  he  would  have  done 
had  he  lived  anj-  considerable  time  after  his  re- 
covery (which  was  certainly  not  the  case,  accord- 
ing to  Berosus.  in  Josephus,  c.  Apiori,  I,  20), 
nor  yet  what  political  relations,  combinations, 
or  considerations  may  have  prevented  the  im- 
mediate execxition  of  a  pl.au  to  restore  the  Jews 
to  their  country,  which  may  already  have  been 
prepared. 

2.  So  for  as  the  conduct  of  Daniel  is  concerned, 
the  characteristic  feature  of  the  two-fold  posi- 
tion which  he  occupied  at  the  Chaldsean  court 
as  a  prophet  of  Jehovah  and  chief  of  the  Ma- 
gians,  is  prominently  exhibited  in  a  manner  that 
affords  a  highly  favorable  testimony  for  the 
credibility  of  the  narrative  as  a  whole.  The 
Jewish  wise  man,  who  is  dignified  by  an  honorary 
ofiBce  rather  than  burdened  with  definite  official 
functions,  e.  g.,  with  sacerdotal  duties,  is  per- 
mitted to  be  absent  at  first,  on  the  occasion 
when  the  interpreters  of  dreams  or  Magians 
were  summoned  before  the  idng,  because  he  was 
allowed  a  greater  freedom  of  action  in  general 
(see  on  v.  6j.  It  was  not,  probably,  without 
producing  a  feeling  of  profound  injury  that 
■when  he  finally  appeared  the  king  addressed  the 
servant  of  the  Hving  God  (vs.  5,  6)  in  a  thor- 
oughly heathen  manner  as  "  Belteehazzar," 
after  the  name  of  his  god  (^.  c,  the  idol  Bel), 
according  to  Calvin's  just  remark,  "Non  dnbium 
est.  quin  hoc  nmnen  grariter  rulneraverit  ani- 
mnm  prnpheto'.''  He  did  not,  however,  re- 
nounce his  allegiance  and  devotion  to  the  royal 
per'fonage  who  was  his  benefactor,  and  who,  in 
case  he  would  receive  and  be  guided  by  the 
prophet's  counsel,  might  so  easily  become  the 
benefactor  a-nd  liberator  of  the  entire  people  of 
God.     When  the  king  had  related   to  him  the 


dream,  so  prophetic  of  misfortune,  he  gave  way 
to  trouble  and  sympathetic  sorrow  '•  about  an 
hour"  (v.  16),  and  the  words  by  which  he  at 
length  introduced  the  interpretation,  invoked  a 
blessing  on  the  king  coupled  with  the  wish  that 
the  fate  which  threatened  the  monarch  might 
rather  overtake  his  foes.  Of.  Calvin  again  : 
"  Daniel  exponit  (v.  16),  curitafuerit  attonitus. 
nempe  quia  eiipei'et  nverti  tarn  horribiletn  paiiam 
a  regis  persona.  Etui  enim  merito  eum  potuit 
detestnri,  tamen  reeeritus  est  potestatem divinitua 
ei  traditam.  Discamus  igitur  exemplo  prophetce, 
bene  precari pro  inimicis  nostris,  qui  cnpivnt  nos 
perdere.  maiime  rero  precari  pro  tyranm'.i,  si 
Deo placeat  svbjici  7ws  eorum  libidini ; — alioquin. 
non  tiintum  illis,  sed  etiam  Deo  ipsi  stnmis  re- 
bettes.  C'ateiiim  altera  ex  parte  ostendit  Daniel, 
se  non  frnngi  ullo  misericordim  affectu,  neque 
etiam  mvUiri.  qxiominus  pergat  in  sva  vocatione." 
— The  manner  in  which  Daniel  succeeded  in 
uniting  the  strictest  theocratic  fidelity  towards 
God  with  this  devotion  to  his  sovereign,  is  seen 
partly  in  the  unconcealed  directness  and  the 
categorical  plainness  with  which  he  announced 
the  most  degrading  and  humiliating  punishment 
to  the  king,  in  v.  22  [25],  and  partly  in  the 
warning  or  epOogue,  v.  24  [27],  with  which  he 
concluded  his  interpretation.  In  this  epilogue 
the  fundamental  dogmatic  and  ethical  ideas  of 
the  entire  section  concentrate  and  crowd  to- 
gether in  pregnant  significance.  The  exposition 
of  this  passage  has  shown  that  the  course  which 
Daniel  here  recommends,  with  a  noble  frankness 
and  an  impressive  fervor,  is  none  other  than  that 
which  should  be  followed  by  every  pious  ruler 
who  is  faithful  in  his  office,  and  in  brief,  that  it 
comprehends  the  sum  of  princely  virtues.  Hence, 
those  expositors  who  find  that  this  passage  rec- 
ommends and  prescribes  work-righteous  con- 
duct, and  especially  the  giving  of  alms,  as  in  it- 
self meritorious,  do  violence  to  the  words. 
Such  expositors  are  the  Rabbins,  who  generally 
ascribe  an  almost  magical  virtue  to  alms-giving, 
and  who  press  every  possible  passage  of  Scrip- 
ture to  support  their  view,  especially  those  con- 
taining the  term  np"1^,  which  is  by  them 
rendered  "well-doing,  alms-giving"  (cf.  Bux- 
torf,  /,ex.  p.  1,891  et  sq. )  ;  further,  the  Roman 
Catholic  exegetes,  who  are  accustomed,  since 
Bellarmine's  detailed  exposition  of  this  passage 
(1.  II.  paitiitentin,  c.  6  ;  cf.  1.  iv.  c.  6),  to  employ 
it  as  one  of  the  principal  proof-texts  for  their 
anti-evangelical  theory  of  justification  and  sancti- 
fication  (in  connection  with  which  they  declare, 
of  course,  that  the  rendering  of  the  Vulgate  : 
"  peceata  tiia  eleemosj/nis  redime,"  is  the  only  cor- 
rect translation) ;  finally,  nearly  all  the  rational- 
intic  expositors,  from  Griesinger  and  Bertholdt 
down  to  Gesenius,  de  Wette,  and  Hitzig,  who, 
while  defending  the  translation  by  Jerome  above 
referred  to,  and  while  referring  to  apocryphal 
passages  like  Ecclus.  iii.  28;  xxtx.  13  ;  Tob.  iv. 
7  et  seq.  ;  xii.  9  et  seq.;  xiv.  10  et  seq.,  en- 
deavor to  find  here  a  work-righteous  "  morality 
of  the  later  Judaism,"  and  therefore  a  certain 
indication  of  the  composition  of  the  book  subse- 
quent to  the  exile.  Grotius  already  pointed 
out  that  even  on  the  adoption  of  the  faulty  Vul- 
gate exegesis,  which  makes  rpl^  equivalent  to 
eleeinosyn(e.  the  passage  does  not  necessarily 
yield  a  sense  favorable  to  Pelagianism  :   "  JV«JM 


CHAP.  III.   31-IV.   34. 


12: 


offendere  qnemqiiam  potest,  quod  operibus  pceiii- 
tenti(E,  in  quibiis  excellunt  eleemosynm,  tribuatur 
id.  quod  panuteiitifB  proprie  conreiiit ;  eH  e/iim 
talis  metoiiymia  aut  synecdoche  frequens."  Still 
better  Melancthon,  in  the  Apolog.  Vonf.  Aug. 
art.  iii.  p.  113  K:  ^' Noii  vokbut  Daniel  regem 
taiUum  eleenutsynnm  largiri,  sed  tutam  paniten- 
tiam  complecUtu)\  quum  ait :  '  Uedirne  peceata 
tua  eleemosynis,''  i.  e.:  redime  peceata  tun  muta- 
tione  cordis  et  operum.  Hie  nutom  et  fides  re- 
quiritur Ac  verba  Daitielis  in  swi  lin- 
gua darius  de  tola  paaitentiii  loquuntur  et  clarius 
promissionem  efferunt :  ^Peceata  tua  per  justi- 
tiain  redime.  et  iniquitates  tuns  beneficiis  erga 
paupcres.'  Heic  verba  prcecipiunt  de  tota  pami- 
tentia  ;  jubent  enim,  ut  Justus  fiat,  deinde  ut 
beneoperetur.  ut.  quod  regis  officiuni  erat,  miseros 
adcersus  injuriam  defendat.  Juslitia  autem  est 
fides  in  corde,"  etc.  He  expresses  himself  sim- 
ilarly in  his  comment  on  the  passage  (0pp.  ed. 
Bretschueider,  vol.  xiii.  p.  843  ss. ),  where  he 
pays  no  attention  to  the  false  rendering  of  np~^ 
in  the  Vulgate  ;  as  does  also  Calvin  in  his  com- 
mentary and  the  Inst.  rel.  Chr.,  III.  4,  31,  36, 
and  among  the  later  Protestant  expositors  especi- 
ally Carpzov,  De  eleemosynis  Judceorum  (in  his 
Apptirat.  historicus  in  the  Critica  Sacra,  p.  720 
Bs. ).  In  all  the  conduct  of  Daniel,  therefore,  as 
described  in  this  section,  nothing  can  be  dis- 
covered which  is  at  variance  with  the  proper  de- 
portment of  a  witness  to  the  faith  and  a  highly 
enlightened  seer  of  the  Old  Covenant  in  the 
presence  of  a  heathen  ruler  of  the  world .  To 
This  deportment  in  practical  life  corresponds  also 
the  tone  observed  by  him  in  the  composition, 
under  the  king's  direction,  of  the  document  be- 
fore us,  whose  agreement  with  the  theocratic 
modes  of  thought  and  conception  has  already 
been  pointed  out. 

3.  In  an  apologetic  respect  the  disharmony 
must  be  noticed,  which  exists  between  what 
might  have  been  expected  from  the  art  of  a 
pseudological  tendency  -  writer  of  Asmonasan 
times,  aud  the  conditions  of  place  and  time  as 
indicated  in  our  narrative.  A  careful  and  un- 
biased examination  of  the  document  with  refer- 
ence to  the  conditions  of  the  Maccabasan  period, 
reveals  at  once  how  empty  and  arbitrary  is 
everything  that  has  been  said  by  Bertholdt, 
Bleek,  Von  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  and  others,  respect- 
ing the  parenetic  aim,  calculated  for  the  time 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  with  which  they  allege 
it  was  written.  "  The  sinner  Nebuchadnezzar, 
who  was  punished  for  his  pride  and  folly,  was  a 
type  of  the  presumptuous  E-iuaii/(,  who  in  like 
manner  sought  improper  associates,  denied  the 
kingly  character,  and  had  but  recently  issued  a 
circular  letter,  although  of  an  entirely  different 
character."  This  brief  extract  from  Hitzig  (p. 
58)  contains  a  whole  brood  of  tendency-critical 
assumptions  and  captious  perversions  of  tlie 
actual  historical  facts,  based  on  the  erection  of 
false  parallels.  It  is  impossible  to  understand 
why  precisely  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  Chaldaean 
king  whose  presumption  was  punished  with 
lycanthro|iy,  should  be  selected  as  a  type  of  the 
proud  Seleuiidian  'E-rrnrnvi/r  (cf.  1  Mace.  i.  21, 
34),  when,  e  g.,  Sennacherib  (2  Kings  xviii.  19), 
Said  (1  Sam.  xvi.  14;  xviii.  10  et  seq. ),  or 
Pharaoh  (Ex.  14),  would  have  furnished  a  far 
more  suitable  parallel  to  the  tyrant  of  the  Mao- 


cabaean  period,  who  was  to  be  punished  for  pre- 
sumptuous fury  against  God,  and  since,  more 
over,  there  is  no  lack,  upon  the  whole,  of 
historical  examples  to  illustrate  the  proverb,  "A 
haughty  spirit  goeth  before  a  fall  "  (Prov.  xvi. 
18).  The  fact  recorded  by  Polybius  xxvi.  10 
(to  which  passage  Hitzig  explicitly  refers),  that 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  a  lover  of  improper, 
i.e.,  immoral,  coarse,  and  riotous  gatherings, 
certainly  finds  but  a  clumsy  illustration  and  an 
exceedingly  vague  foreshadowing  in  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's association  with  the  beasts  of  the  held. 
The  analogy  is  merely  superficial,  and  that  to  a 
degree  in  which  it  dissolves  into  incougruity  and 
even  absurdity,  whenever  it  is  submitted  to  a 
careful  examination  (cf.  Kranichf.  p.  174  et 
seq.).  With  reference  to  the  third  parallel,  that 
both  tyrants  issued  circular  letters,  Hitzig  him- 
self concedes  that  the  circular  mentioned  in  1 
Mace.  i.  41  et  seq.  was  "  really  of  a  nature 
entirely  different "  from  that  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar's edict.  The  mere  fact,  therefore,  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  addressed  a  circular  to  his  sub- 
jects, convinces  him  that  it  was  typical  of  the 
other  fact,  that  Epiphanes  also  issued  such  a 
docuinent^as  if  any  king  whatsver  could  reign 
but  a  single  year,  without  publishing  some  mam- 
festo,  or  edict,  or  circular,  etc.  !  Hitzig's  treat- 
ment of  chap.  iv.  28  [31],  (the  sentence  of 
Divine  punishment  denounced  on  Nebu  ;had 
nezzar,  "  The  kingdom  is  departed  from  thee"), 
by  which  he  endeavors  to  demonstrate  the 
special  time  in  the  Maccaba;an  epoch  during 
which  this  section  originated,  results  in  similar 
absurdities.  He  holds  that  the  threat  of  an  im- 
mediate overthrow,  or  rather  of  a  ruin  already 
in  progress,  clearly  indicates  that  the  document 
was  "  composed  at  a  time  when  the  Asmonaeana 
had  already  taken  up  arms  and  had  gained  the 
upper  hand,"  hence  in  the  period  designated  in 
1  Mace.  ii.  42^8  ;  as  if  any  real  analogy  ex- 
isted between  the  punishment  of  a  presumptuous 
spirit  by  means  of  a  severe  mental  disease,  and 
the  political  and  religious  revolt  of  an  oppressed 
nation  against  their  persecutors !  and  further, 
as  if  the  syncretistic  Chaldaan  king,  who  ad- 
mitted all  religions,  could  by  any  means  be 
placed  in  comparison  with  Antiochus,  the  fa- 
natically intolerant  worshipper  of  Zeus  !  How 
can  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  was  exhorted  to  mercy 
toward  the  "poor"  (T;!",  v.  24  [27],  be  brought 
into  parallelism  with  the  Syrian  king,  who  was 
engaged  in  an  open  conflict  with  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  Theocracy  {i.e..  with  the  armed 
bands  of  Israelitish  heroes  inflamed  with  rage, 
who,  moreover,  could  at  that  time  hardly  be 
termed  the  poor)  ? — the  world-monarch  of  the 
captivity,  who  was  punished  indeed,  but  whose 
punishment  led  him  to  repent  and  be  converted, 
with  the  incorrigibly  hardened  and  diabolized 
antichrist  upon  the  throne  of  the  Seleucidas,  whc 
for  that  very  reason  was  regarded  as  hopele.'ssly 
lost,  and  as  the  certain  prey  of  eternal  damna- 
tion, from  a  theocratic  point  of  view  ?  And  in 
relation  to  the  conduct  of  Daniel — where,  in  the 
theocratic  state,  and  especially  among  the 
apocalyptists  of  the  Maccabjcan  period  who  were 
enthusiasts  for  God,  could  a  parallel  to  the 
prophet  of  this  chapter  be  found  ?  VtTiat  ser- 
vant of  Jehovah  in  that  age  can  be  mentioned, 
who.  like  our  prophet,  and  in  analogy  with  the 


l'-/ii 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


course  of  the  Syrian  captain  Naaman  (2  Kings 
V.  18),  would  quietly  sojourn  at  the  court  and 
in  the  immediate  presence  of  a  heathen  ruler ; 
who  would  have  counselled  the  king  in  friend- 
ship, warned  him  in  loving  earDe.=tness,  supported 
and  comforted  him,  as  Daniel  actually  did  in  his 
intercourse  with  the  Chaldasan  monarch,  accord- 
ing to  the  statements  of  our  section  ?  Certain 
passage?  of  the  Talmud,  (Hilchot  Bozeach,  xii. 
15;  Bubn  Bathrn,  f.  4,  p.  1)  may  serve  to  indi- 
cate the  kind  of  description  which  the  Maccabsan 
age  would  probably  have  given  of  the  ancient 
Daniel.  It  is  there  asserted  that  God  afterwards 
punished  that  prophet,  because  he  had  wasted 
good  advice  and  instruction  on  the  heathen 
Nebuchadnezzar,  such  as  are  found  in  chap.  iv. 
34  !  In  addition,  cf.  the  doxology  api)ended  by 
the  Sept.  to  chap,  iv  34,  for  an  illustration  of 
the  manner  in  which  that  age  would  have  de- 
scribed a  Nebuchadnezzar  who  should  actually 
repent  and  turn  to  God.  In  that  passage  the  re- 
stored king  is  represented  as  renouncing  forever 
the  heathen  gods  as  being  utterly  powerless,  as 
promising  to  dedicate  himself  and  his  people  to 
the  constant  service  of  Jehovah,  and  as  honor- 
ing and  exulting  the  Jewish  people  with  exces- 
sive praise  ! — Upon  the  whole  cf.  Kranichfeld, 
p.  170  et  seq.  and  p.  203.  See  also  Ibid.,  p. 
175:  "The  situation,  however,  becomes  no  more 
conceivable,  if,  for  the  purpose  of  demonstrat- 
ing the  invention  of  this  section  as  a  sketch 
copied  from  the  circumstances  of  the  reign  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  its  composition  be  placed 
prior  to  the  armed  revolt  mentioned  in  1  Mace, 
ii.  42  et  seq.  and  consequently  in  a  time  when 
Antiochus  raged  in  unresisted  power  against  the 
helpless  Jews.  In  this  case  it  must  be  allowed 
indeed,  that  the  writer  possessed  considerable 
prophetic  gifts,  so  that  even  Hitzig  ascribes 
prophecy  to  him  in  relation  to  the  final  fate  of 
Epiphanes,  mthout  characterizing  it  as  prophecy 
ex  erentu.  The  definite  and  unconditional  pre- 
diction concerning  the  loss  of  the  kingdom  by 
means  of  force,  v.  28  et  eeq. ,  would  thus  be 
fully  realized  ;  and  likewise  that  foretelling  of  a 
peculiar  disease  by  which  he  should  be  brought 
to  a  humble  recognition  of  the  God  of  the  Jews, 
even  though  it  were  not  a  disease  of  the  mind 
(cf.  2  Mace.  ix.  5  et  seq.).  The  total  desertion 
to  which  he  was  actxially  expo-sed  during  the 
progress  of  his  disease  (cf.  3  Mace.  ix.  9)  i^i 
ih'iir  iv  Tiiiq  opeaiv  (ibid.  V.  38)  would  have  re- 
flected honor  on  the  prophetic  threat  of  the  al- 
leged forger  (cf.  Dan.  iv.  23,  29  et  seq.).  But 
besides  mistaking  the  nature  of  the  disease,  he 
has  unfortunately  erred  with  reference  to  the 
recovery,  and  on  that  very  account  he  is  com- 
pelled, according  to  Hitzig,  to  renounce  the 
honor  of  composing  a  prophecy  nfte?-  the  event 
had  transpired,  and  that  without  compensation 
for  the  otherwise  really  wonderful  prediction  of 
the  three  circumstances  mentioned  above,  whose 
combined  fulfillment  of  itself  assuredly  deserves 
the  distinguishing  attribute  of  pseudo-prophecy. 
But  there  still  remains  the  oracle  of  chap.  iv. 
23  [36],  an  expression  on  the  part  of  a  Jew  re- 
garded as  a  model  of  the  patriot  who  is  jealous 
because  the  law  of  his  God  is  trodden  under 
foot,  and  which  is  ambif/uwis  when  compa'^ed 
with  the  circumst<ances  of  the  period  of  persecu- 
tion under  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  therefore 
inconceivable  in  a  historical  point  of  view,  since 


that  yeriod  preceded  the  armed  rising.  More- 
over, it  must  seem  strange  at  the  least,  that  the 
writer  should  content  himself  at  the  time  of 
Epiphanes  with  assigning  such  very  ordinary 
limits  to  the  sinfulness  and  presumptuous  pride 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  while  the  violence  done  to 
the  sanctuary  of  Israel  is  not  mentioned  with  a 
single  word,  for  instance,  in  v.  34  [37]  ;  and  yet 
it  was  this  very  act  which  ranked  chief  in  im- 
portance in  the  eyes  of  Antiochus  himself  (cf.  i. 
Mace.  31-34,  36  et  seq.,  44  et  seq.;  v.  1  et  seq.), 
and  which  was  regarded  as  the  most  heinous  crime 
of  that  tyrant,  and  as  the  principal  ground  for 
the  lamentations  of  pious  .lews  in  the  Maccabaean 
,  period,  as  well  as  of  the  Divine  vengeance  visited 
on  him  ;  cf.  1  Mace,  ii  S-13  ;  iii.  .55,  51,  58  et 
seq.;  iv.  3S  et  seq.;  vi.  13etseq.  Such  a  sUenca 
in  this  connection  with  regard  to  so  scandalous 
a  deed  is  the  more  remarkable,  since  the  histori- 
cal books  expressly  record  the  robbery  of  the 
sanctuary  perpetrated  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  which 
action  was  known  to  our  author,  according  to 
chap.  i.  2  ;  cf.  v.  3,  as  well  as  to  his  compatriots. 
He  was  not  obliged  therefore,  as  a  cmitimts 
forger,  to  fear  that  he  shou^d  betray  his  pseudo- 
nymity  by  the  mention  of  the  sacred  edifice. 
How  greatly  the  Sept.  animated  by  the  spirit 
and  views  of  the  Maccab^an  time,  niii.st  have 
desired  to  find  in  the  words  of  Daniel  v.  19,  a 
condemnatory  mention  of  the  violence  done  to 
the  temple  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  how  ap- 
propriate it  would  seem  to  them,  may  appear 
from  their  addition  to  v.  19,  which  is  certainly 
significant  for  the  AsmouEean  period,  and  for 
that  reason  has  unjustly  been  eliminated  by 
Tischendorf  without  ceremony :  i'-ij'uiiiT/  co'v  r/ 
Kaodia  VTT€p7j(pavig  kol  i(j;\;ii  VKqi  to.  -rrpb^  tov  dywv 
Kal  roiif  a-}}£Xovc  aiirov,  Td  £p}a  gov  Cxp^?/  Ka\}6~t 
i^rjp^fii^oar,  tuv  oIkov  tov  ^  e  o  b  tov 
^ Liv  TO^  eTTi  TnJg  npapTiatc TOV  ?.aoi<  tov  ijyiacfih'ov." 
— The  exact  acquaintance  of  the  writer  with  the 
architectural  condition  of  Babylon  (cf.  the  ex- 
egesis) which  is  apparent  in  vs.  20  [29],  and  37 
[30],  and  is  as  unlocked  for  as  it  is  evident,  de- 
serves to  be  mentioned  as  a  circumstance  of 
especial  force  as  bearing  against  the  hypothesis 
of  a  fiction  in  the  interests  of  a  tendency  of  the 
Maccabjean  period.  A  Maccabasan  author  would 
scarcely  have  represented  that  bis  typical  pseudo- 
Antiochus  was  overtaken  by  a  fearful  visitation 
of  Divine  justice  in  the  form  of  an  unusual 
disease,  while  walking  on  the  roof  of  his  own 
palace  and  within  the  limits  of  his  capital.  The 
temptation  to  let  him  encounter  this  fate  in  the 
place  where  Epiphanes  succumbed  to  his,  "in 
a  strange  land  and  in  the  desert,"  would  have 
been  almost  irresistible  (cf.  2  Mace.  is.  3.  38). 

4.  Hnmiletknl  suggestions. — The  features  of 
practical  importance  in  this  section  are  con- 
centrated in  V.  34  [37],  the  same  passage  in 
which  Daniel's  words  of  exhortation  and  warn- 
ing to  the  king  furnish  the  leading  elements  of 
dogmatic  significance.  Not  merely  is  the  counsel 
of  Daniel,  recommending  the  practice  of  the 
Tirtues  belonging  to  a  ruler  who  pleases  God, 
such  as  the  doing  of  works  of  righteousness  and 
mercy  (cf.  supra.  No.  3),  worthy  of  notice  and 
of  thorough  homiletical  treatment ;  but  equ.ally 
so  the  impulse  which  constrains  and  encouragea 
him  to  venture  this  exhortation — his  faith  in 
the  willingness  of  God  to  avert  the  threatened 
punishment  from  the  king,  in  case  he  should 


CHAP.  V.  1-30. 


12c 


repent  and  be  converted  while  it  was  yet  time  ; 
his  truly  prophetic  and  theocratic  conviction 
that  God  might  possibly  repent  of  His  purpose, 
on  the  fulfilment  of  the  proper  co»ditions  by  the 
threatened  person.  In  this  connection  see  the 
prophetic  parallels  adduced  above,  and  compare 
the  remarks  of  Jerome  on  this  subject:  "  &' 
prcsdlxit  i^iintriiiiann  iJei,  qucsnon  pote-H  immutari, 
quotjuido  kortatur  ad  deeinosynas  et  misericofdiui 
paupwum.  ut  Dei  sententia  commutetur  ?  Quod 
facile  solcitiir  Ezeehiw  regit  exemplo,  quern  Isajaa 
dixerateifse moriturum.  et  Ni/iivitarum,  guibusdic- 
tum  est :  Adhuc  rjuiidraginta  dies,  et  Niiiive  sub- 
vei'tetur.  Et  tanieii  adpreces  Ezechiie  et  Niiiive  Dei 
sententia commutata  est ;  non  vanitatejudicii,  sed 
illorum  eonversione  qui  meruere  indulgentiam. 
Alioqiiiii  et  ill  Jeremia  loquitur  Deiis  se  mala 
minari  super  geritem ;  et  si  bona  fecerit,  minas 
dementia  commvtare.  Mursum  bona  agenti  se 
asxent  puUiceri,  et  si  mala  fecerit,  dicit  se  mutnre 
mam  senteiUiam  ;  non  in  homines  sed  in  oj)era, 
qua;  mutata  sunt.  Neque  enim  Deus  /lominibus, 
sed  vitiis  irascitur ;  quce  quum  in  homine  non 
fuerint,  nequaquam  punit  quod  mutatum  est." 
Cf.  also  Melancthon,  Calvin,  Geier  and  Starke, 
on  this  passage,  and  further,  the  expositions  of 
Biblical  theologians  on  the  Old-Testament  teach- 
ing concerning  the  repentance  of  God,  e.g., 
Steudel,  Theologie  des  A.  Ts.,  p.  ISl  et  seq.  ; 
Havemick,  Vorlens.,  p.  65  et  seq.;  F.  Majer, 
Was  hast  da  wider  das  Aite  Testament?  (Stutt- 
gart, 1804),  p.  118  etseq.,  andKling,  in  Herzog's 
Beal-Encykl.,  art.  Reue,  vol.  xii.  p.  764. — The 
theme  derived  from  v.  24  [27j  might  therefore 
'je  formulated  :  "  Repent  of  thy  sin,  and  God 
ivHl  repeat  of  the  punishment  threatened  against 
thee;  "  or,  "  The  aim  of  Divine  punishment  is 
the  conversion  of  men ;  if  this  be  attained,  how 
f ladly  will  He  cause  the  punishment  to  cease  " 
(Starke);  or,  "Be  ye  therefore  merciful,  as 
your  Father  also  is  merciful  "  (Luke  vi.  3(i).* 

*  [''This  noble  example  of  manly  and  Christian  fidelity  to 
his  sovereign  is  worthy  of  all  admiration,  and  of  course  inii- 
union.  Prompted  by  such  manifest  love  and  in  manner  so 
respectful  to  the  king,  and  yet  with  so  much  personal  dig- 
ally,  it  must  have  fallen  upon  the  king's  inind  with  great 


Additional  points  of  departure  for  homileticaJ 
discussion  and  observation  are  afforded  in  chap, 
iti.  31-33  [iv.  1-3],  and  chap.  iv.  31-34  [34-37J, 
the  introductory  and  closing  doxologies  of  th? 
report.  These  are  particulai'ly  adapted  to  serve 
as  points  of  connection  for  sermons  upon  the 
entire  narrative,  having  the  theme,  "All  the 
works  of  God  are  truth,  and  His  ways  judgment" 
(iv.  34  [o7J  ) ;  or,  "Humble  yourselves  in  the 
sight  of  God,  and  He  shall  lift  you  up  "  (Jas. 
iv.  10)  ;  or,  "God  puts  down  the  mighty  from 
their  seats,  and  exalts  them  of  low  degree " 
(Luke  i.  53),  etc.  Cf.  especially  what  Theodoret 
observes,  on  chap.  iv.  31  :  l:oaavT7iv  oxpiAeiav  6 
Naiiovxudovdaop     ek    tuv    cvfifliopfjv     E^E^aTO,     on 

7^pO(^7]7LliC)^  ~Epi    TOV  ^EOV    Kol    (ppOVEi    Kal  0i?t)7  era/, 

Kai  (jf  EK  auu^uvinc  rwo^  n-n-o  ri/t;  kt'iheu^  TrdaJiv  -r/v 
vfivuiSiav  vonii'Ei.  Another  homiletical  text  is  con- 
tained in  chap.  iv.  3  [6]  et  seq.,  on  which  Cramer 
(in  Starke)  obseiTes  correctly,  "  If  human  wis- 
dom cannot  interpret  and  explain  a  dream,  it  is 
much  less  able  to  discover  the  secrets  of  God. 
Human  reason  should  therefore  not  be  permitted 
to  be  master  in  Divine  things ;  for  none  can 
know  what  is  in  God,  except  the  Spirit  of  God." 
A  still  further  passage  of  homiletical  bearing  is 
chap.  iv.  20-30  [29-33] ,  a  powerful  and  awfully 
impressive  illustration  of  the  proverb,  "Pride 
goeth  before  destruction"  (Prov.  xvi.  18).  Cf. 
Starke  :  "  When  a  man  permits  the  time  for  re- 
pentance to  pass  witliout  a  change  of  disposition, 
the  Divine  punishment  overtakes  him  in  the 
midst  of  his  sins.  He  then  learns  that  the 
threatenings  of  God  were  not  idle  words"  (Num. 
xvi.  13,  31  et  seq). 


force. — The  sin  specially  indicated  here,  unrighteous  oppres- 
sion of  the  poor,  looks  very  probably  toward  the  terrible 
exactions  of  labor  imposed  upon  his  ilelenceless  subjects 
(some  of  them  captives  of  war)  in  those  immense  public 
works  which  were,  in  the  eyes  of  men,  the  glory  of  his  reign. 
The  eye  of  m;in,  dazzled  with  so  much  architectural  splendor, 
commonly  fails  to  look  down  throui^h  Ui  the  crushed  bodies 
and  broken  hearts,  and  to  the  hopele-s-s,  never-lifted  pressure 
of  woe  which  such  a  mass  of  coerced  labor  always  signifies. 
Uumau  eyes  rarely  see  it,  still  more  rarely  make  any  account 
of  it,  but  the  Great  Father  sees  it  and  can  never  fail  to  takt 
it  into  most  solemn  accoimt.^'— Coic/eti.] 


J.  Belshazzar'i  feast,  and  DanieVs  foresluidowing  of  the  doionfall  of  the  CJialdaan  Empire,  based 
upon  the  mysterious  handwriting  on  the  wall. 

Chap.  V.  1-30. 

1  Belshazzar  the  king  made  a  groat  feast  to  a  thousand  of  his  lords,  and  drank 

2  wine'  before  the  thousand.  Belsliazzar,  while  he  tasted  [in  the  taste  of]  the 
wine,  commanded  to  bring  the  golden  and  silver  vessels  which  his  father" 
Nebuchadnezzar  had  taken  out  of  the  temple  which  was  in  Jerusalem ;  that 
[and]  the  king  and  his  princes  [lords],  his  wives  and  his  concubines,  might  drink 

3  tlierein.  Then  they  brought  the  golden  vessels  that  were  taken  out  of  the  temple 
of  the  house  of  God  which  was  at  [in]  Jerusalem  ;  and  the  king  and  his  princes 

4  [lords],  his  wives  and  his  concubines,  drank  in  them.  They  drank  wine'  and 
praised  the  gods  of  gold,  and  of  silver,  (/brass,  of  iron,  of  wood,  and  of  alone. 

5  In  the  same  hour  came  forth  fingers  of  a  man's  hand,  and  wrote  over  against 
the  candlestick  upon  the  piaster  of  the  wall  of  the  king's  palace  ;  and  the  king 

6  saw  the  part  of  the  iiand  that  wrote.  Tlien  tiie  king's  .'ountenance  loas  changed,' 
and  his  thoughts  troubled  [would  trouble]  him,  su  that  [and]  the  joints  of  iiis 
loins  [loin]  were  loosed,  and  his  knees  smote  one  against  anotlier  [this  to  that| 


124  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


7  The  king  cried  aloud  [with  might]  to  bring  in  the  astrologers,  the  Chaklaeang 
and  the  sootlisayers.  A^ul  the  king  spake,  and  said  to  the  wise  men  of  Babylon 
Whosoever  [That  any  man  that]  shall  read  this  writing,  and  shew  me  the  inter 
pretation  thereof,  shall  be  clotlied  with  scarlet  [put  on  the  purple],  and  have  a 
[the]  chain  of  gold  about  [upon]  his  neck,  and  shall  be  the  third  ruler  [rule 

8  third]  in  the  kingdom.  Then  came  in  all  the  king's  wise  men:  but  [and]  they 
could  not  read  [call]  tlie  writing,  nor  [and]  make  known  to  the  king  [make  the 

9  king  know]  the  interpretation  thereof.  Then  was  [the]  king  Belshazzar  greatly 
troubled,  and  his  countenance  was  changed  in  him,'  and  his  lords  wei-e  aston- 
ished. 

10  Now  the  queen,  by  reason  of  the  words  of  the  king  and  his  lords,  came  into 
the  banquet-house  [house   of  the    drinking]  ;  and  the  queen  spake  and  said,  O 

11  king,  live  for  ever;  let  not  thy  thoughts  ti'ouble  thee,  nor  let  thy  countenance 
be  changed.'  There  is  a  man  in  thy  kingdom,  in  whom  is  the  spirit  oi  tlte  lioly 
gods :  and,  in  the  days  of  thy  fatlier,  light,  and  understanding,  and  wisdom, 
like  the  wisdom  of  the  gods,  was  found  in  him;  whom  [and]  tlie  king  Nebu- 
chadnezzar thy  father,  the  king,  I  say,  thy  father,  made  [appointed  him]  mastei 

12  of  the  magicians,  astrologers,  ChaldiBans,  awrf  soothsayers  ;  forasmuch  as  an 
excellent  spirit,  and  knowledge,  and  understanding,  interpreting  of  dreams,  and 
shewing  of  hard  sentences  [riddles],  and  dissolving  of  doubts  [knots],  were 
[was]  found  in  the  same  [in  him]  Daniel,  whom  the  king  named  [put  his 
naraeJBelteshazzar:  now  let  Daniel  be  called,  and  he  will  shew  [or,  and  shew] 
the  interpretation. 

13  Then  was  Daniel  brought  in  before  the  king.  And  the  king  spake  and  said 
unto  Daniel,  Art  thou  that  Daniel,  which  art  of  the  children  of  the  captivity  of 

14  Judah,"  whom  the  king  my  father  brought  out  of  Jewry  .[Judah]  ?  ^  I  have 
even  heard  of  [upon]  thee,  that  the  spirit  of  the  gods  is  in  thee,  and  that  light, 

15  and  understanding,  and  excellent  wisdom,  is  [was]  found  in  thee.  And  now 
the  wise  men,  the  astrologers,  have  been  brought  in  before  me,  that  they  should 
read  [call]  this  writing,  and  make  known  unto  me  [make  me  know]  the  inter- 
pretation thereof:  but  [and]  they  could  not  shew  the  interpretation  of  the  thing. 

16  And  I '  have  heard  of  [upon]  thee  that  thou  canst  make  [interpret]  interpreta- 
tions and  dissolve  doubts  [knots] :  now,  if  thou  canst  read  [call]  the  writ- 
ing and  make  known  to  me  [make  me  know]  the  interpretation  tiiereof,  thou 
shalt  he  clothed  with  scarlet  [put  on  the  purple  |,  and  have  a  [the]  chain  of  gold 
about  [upon]  thy  neck,  and  shalt  be  the  third  ruler  [rule  tlie  third]  in  the 
kingdom. 

17  Then  Daniel  answered  and  said  before  the  king.  Let  thy  gifts  be  to  thyself 
[thee],  and  give  thy  rewards  [largesses]  to  another ;  yet  I  will  read  [call]  tho 
writing  unto  the  king,  and  make  known  to  him  [make  him  know]  the   interpre 

18  tation.  O  thou  king,  [Thou  O  king — ]  the  mosinigh  God  gave  [to]  Nebuchad- 
nezzar thy  father  a   [the]   kingdom,  and   majesty   [greatness],  and  glory,  and 

19  honour.  And,  for  [fiom]  the  majesty  [greatness]  that  he  gave  him,  all  people, 
nations  [the  nations,  peoples],  and  languages,  trembled  and  feared  [were  trem- 
bling and  fearing  from]  before  him :  whom  he  would  he  slew,  and  whom  he 
would  he  kept  alive,  and  whom  he  would   he  set  up,  and  whom   he  would  he 

20  put  down.'  But  [And]  when  his  heart  was  lifted  up,  and  his  mind  [spirit] 
hardened  in  pride  [to  act  proudly],  he  was  deposed  from  his  kingly  throne  [the 
throne  of  his  kingdom],  and  they  took  [caused  to  pass  away]  his  glory  [the 

21  dignity]  from  him.  And  he  was  driven  from  the  sons  of  men  [mankind]  ;  and 
his  heart  was  made  like  [with]  the  beasts  [living  creatures],  and  iiis  dwelling 
was  with  the  wild-asses  :  they  fed  him  with  [would  make  him  eat]  grass  [herb- 
age] like  oxen,  and  his  body  was  [would  be]  wet  with  [from]  the  dew  of  heaven 
[the  heavens]  ;  till  [that]  he  knew  that  the  most  high  God  ruled  in  the  kingt^"ui 
of  men  [mankind],  and  that  he  appointeth  [will  set   up]  over  it  whomsoevei  ae 

22  [may]  will.     And   thou"  his   son,  0  Belshazzar,  hast   not  humbled   thy   heart, 

23  though  [because]  thou  knewest  all  this ;  but  [and]  hast  lifted  up  thyseli 
against  the  Lord  '"  of  heaven  [the  heavens]  :  and  they  have  brought  the  vessels 
of  his  bouse  before  thee,  and  thou  and  thy  lords,  thy  wives  and  thy  concubines, 


CHAP.  V.  1-30. 


12- 


24 

25 
26 
27 

28 


29 


have  drank  [are  drinking]  wine '  in  them  :  and  thou  liast  praised  ihe  gods  of 
silver  and  gold,  of  brass,  iron,  wood,  and  stone,  which  see  not,  nor  hear,  noi 
know  ;  and  the  God  in  whose  hand  thy  breath  is,  and  whose  are  all  thy  ways, 
hast  thou  not  glorified.  Then  was  the  part  of  the  hand  sent  from  [before] 
him  ;  and  this  writing  was  written  [signed]. 

And    this  is  tlie   writing  that  was   written   [signed],  mene,  mkne,  tekel, 
UPHAKSix.       This    is    the    interpretation     of    the    thing     [or,     word]  :     mexe 
numbered]  ;  God  "   hath   numbered  thy  kingdom,  and  finished   it.      tekel 
weighed]  ;  Thou  art  weighed  in  the  balances,  and   art  found  wanting,     peres 
divided]  ;  thy  kingdom  is  divided,  and  given  to  the  Medes  [Media]  and  Per- 
sians [Persia]. 

Then  commanded  [said]  Belshazzar,  and  they  clothed  Daniel  with  scarlet  [tlie 
purple],  and  jjut  a  [the]  chain  oi  gold  about  [upon]  his  neck,  and   made  a  pro- 
clainatiiin  concerning  [upon]  him,  that  he  should  be  the  third  ruler  in  the  king- 
30  dom.     In  that  night  was  Belshazzar  the  king  of  the  Chaldaeans  slain. 


GRAMMATICAL   NOTES. 

[*  The  emphatic  state  in  St^lJOHj  Ulce  the  art.  in  Heb,  and  Gr.,  is  equivalent  to  the  pers.  pron.  his  tctne. — ^  25< 

frequently  used,  in  all  the  Shemitic  tongues,  of  a  forefather,  whether  immediate  or  remote. — *  Literally,  the  king — his 
bright  looics  changed  for  him. — *  Liter-'lly,  his  bright  looks  were  changing  upon  him. — *  Literally,  and  let  not  thy  Itright 
looks  be  changed. — «  The  form   n^rt",   apocopated  for  brevity's  sake  from  m^H^'  is  exclusively  applied  in  Biblical 

Chaldee  to  .ludmn. — '  The  pronoun  is  emphatic,  being  expressed. — ®  The  participial  form  of  thsse  verbs  {whom  he  was 
willing  he  leas  killing,  and  lohom  ti£  wojt  icilting  he  ?£><?«  nutktnp  live,  and  tchutn  he  waft  icilliug  he  was  raising,  and 
whom  he  was  wilting  he  wa^t  depressing)  indicates  the  continued  as  well  as  absolute  i>ower  of  the  autocrat. — '  The  pro- 
noun here  is  resumptive  of  that  which  stands  absolutely  in  verse  18. — i**   5t^^   is  the  Chaldee  equivalent  of  "^"ni^- 

•  ■'    Snbst  is  significant  of  the  (riM  God,  like  Dinbsn]. 


EXRGETICAL    REMARKS. 

Verses  1-4.  The  rfesecrntion  of  the  sniyred  res- 
tels  of  the  temple  at  the  roi/nl  feast.  Belshazzar 
the  king  made  a  great  feast.  The  name  of  the 
king  ^2S*n;a  differs  in  its  orthography  merely 
from  the  Chaldee  name  12!«-3t:b3,  which  Neb- 
uchadnezzar, according  to  chap.  i.  7  (cf.  infra, 
V.  12  of  this  chapter),  had  conferred  on  Daniel, 
as  it  omits  the  f -sound  between  the  letters  I  and 
ih.  It  is  therefore  a  softened  form,  having  the 
Same  etymological  significance  in  its  elements, 
and  both  are  equivalent  to  Belt  priitceps,  =  the 
Bel-sarussiir  of  the  Babylonian  inscriptions  (cf. 
Introd.,  S  f^i  note  3).  According  to  Hitzig  (on  i. 
7.  and  on  this  passage),  Bel-tsh-dznr  is  synony- 
mous with  the  Sanscrit  Pilla-tsht^arn,  "pro- 
vider and  devourer,"  while  in  Bel-sliiizzar  the 
middle  member  of  this  compound,  the  Sanscr. 
and  Zend  copula  tslm.  "  and,"  has  been  dropped 
out  and  replaced  by  the  Heb.  relative  •,:■,  so  that 
the  shortened  form  signifies.  "  provider,  who  (is) 
devourer."  This  hypothesis  appears  altogether 
too  artificial,  and.  like  the  direct  derivation  of 
the  word  from  the  Aryan,  is  doubtful,  especially 
as  the  Bel-sarussur  of  the  inscriptions  on  the 
Babylonian  monuments  favors  it  but  little. 
Ewald's  assumption  that  the  royal  name  2??3 
comprehends  the  name  of  the  male  god  Bel, 
while  that  of  Daniel,  ^""33,  includes  that  of 
the  goddess  Belt,  is  likewise  without  suflScient 
proof,  and  is  opposed  by  chap.  iv.  .5  [8],  and 
also  by  the  orthography  with  o  instead  of  p. — 
Concerning  the  hypothesis  th.it  Belshazzar  was 
the  same  as  Evil-merodach,  the  son  and  imme- 
diate successor  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  see  the 
Introd.,  §  8,  note  3. — Made  a  great  feast,  i.e., 


caused  it  to  be  made.  1??^,  "  he  had  prepared," 
as  in  chap.  iii.  1.  ^\y?,  "bread,  food,"  compre- 
hends the  beverages  (Hn'.l"?3,  v.  10)  also,  as  the 
second  half  of  the  verse  shows  ;  cf.  in  the  Heb., 
Gen.  xxvi.  30;  1  Sam.  xxv.  yU  ;  Ecc.  x.  19. — . 
And  drank  wine  before  the  thousand.  This 
does  not  probably  mean  that  he  "vied  with 
them  in  drinking"  (Hiivemick),  but  that  he 
"drank  in  their  presence,  while  .seated  at  a 
separate  table," — as  was  the  custom  of  the  Per- 
sian kings  on  the  occasion  of  their  great  ban- 
quets, according  to  Athenseus,  Dciprio.i.  iv,  10. 
On  the  expre.ssion,  "to  eat  and  drink  before 
others,"  cf.  Jer.  Hi.  33  ;  it  differs  m.aterially 
from  "  to  eat  and  drink  itith  others,"  Ex.  xviii. 
13;  Acts  X.  41,  etc.  The  number  of  the  king's 
guests,  a  thoUMind  lords  (grand-officers,  mighty 
ones,  cf.  iv,  33  [30],  which  the  Sept.  doubles, 
(!((7Y'''-"").  is  not  remarkable,  when  it  is  remem- 
bered that,  according  to  Ctesias  (in  Athen.,  1.  c. ). 
the  Persian  king  provided  daily  for  fifteen  thou- 
sand persons  at  his  table ;  that,  according  to 
Curtius,  Alexander  the  Great  invited  ten  thou- 
sand to  a  wedding  feast ;  and  that  Ptolemy 
Dionysius  (according  to  Pliny,  H.  N..  XXXIII. 
10)  supported  a  thousand  soldiers  of  the  army 
of  Pompey  the  Great  from  his  kitchen. 
["The  number  specified  is  evidently  a  round 
number,  i.e..  the  number  of  the  guests  amount- 
ed to  about  a  thous,aud  "  (Keil).]  However, 
according  to  the  genuinely  Oriental  custom, 
which  is  attested,  e.;/..  by  Herodotus,  II.  78,  in 
the  case  of  the  Egyptians,  and  by  ^Elian,  V.  U. . 
XI.  1,  among  the  Persians,  the  wine -drinking  oi 
ca.xous2i\  follows  upon  the  feast  proper.  At  such 
times,  and  especially  at  a  court  like  the  Baby- 
lonian immediately  prior  to  the  Persian  period, 
i  the  banqueters   may  have  given  way  to  all  the 


12J 


THE  PROPHET  DA^fIEL. 


excesses  of  their  dissolute  frivolity,  in  the  man- 
ner described  in  the  ensujng  narrative.  In  rela- 
tion to  the  drunkenness  and  wantonness  of  the 
Babj'lonians,  cf.  Isa.  xiv.  11  ;  xlvii.  1  ;  Jer.  li. 
3:i;  Herod.,  I.  193,  193;  Athena;us,  XIV.  p. 
601  ;  Ciirtius.  V.  1  etc. — Verse  2.  Belshazzar, 
■while  he  tasted  the  wine,  commanded,  etc. 
St^in  Sf;w2,  "while  tasting,  while  enjoying  the 
wine,"  therefore,  while  under  its  influence ;  cf. 
Prov.  XX.  1  ;  Acts  ii.  13  ;  and  in  regard  to  -I's, 
cf.  Job  \i.  6.  [It  "does  not  mean  merely  sip- 
ping in  order  to  determine  the  flavor,  or  as  a  pre- 
lude to  drinking  more  freely,  but  drinking  with 
rilish.  and  therefore  plentifully"  (Stuart).]  — 
To  bring  the  golden  and  silver  vessels,  name- 
ly, out  of  the  "  treasure-house  of  the  gods."  in 
which  they  had  been  deposited  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, according  to  chap.  i.  2,  The  etymology 
of  the  name  Belshazzar  invented  by  Saadia  and 
favored  by  Hitzig.  by  which  it  is  derived  from 
this  very  act  of  causing  the  vessels  to  be  brought 
from  the  treasure-house  (-iS,  ''to  seek"  and 
IIT'N),  is  an  idle  vagary  that  never  entered  into 
the  mind  of  the  writer. — That  the  king  .... 
and  his  concubines  might  drink  therein.  The 
1  in  l"~r ^1  is  expressive  of  the  design ;  cf. 
chap.  i.  5  b.  nnd  with  3,  "to  drink  from  a 
vessel,"  occurs  also  in  vs.  3  and  23  ;  cf.  Winer, 
g  51,  1. — His  wives  and  his  concubines.  ;3U! 
designates  the  legal  consort  as  contrasted  with 
the  concubine  (n^ni),  as  in  the  Hebrew  (Psa. 
xlv.  10;  Neh.  ii.  6).  The  Sept.  represents  only 
the  concubines  as  present  at  the  feast  (both  here 
and  in  vs.  3  and  33).  being  apparently  governed 
in  this  by  what  is  described  in  Esther!  9  etseq. 
(cf.  Josephus.  Ant.,  XI.  G,  1)  as  the  court  custom 
of  the  «/(c/t'«<  Persians  ;  but  even  with  reference 
to  them.  Herodotus  (v.  18)  testifies  that  their 
wives  {unvftit^rai  yi'viiiKsr')  were  admitted  to  ban- 
quets (cf.  also  Plutarch,  Sympos.  I.  1  and 
Macrob.  vii.  1,  who  represent  that  at  least  con- 
cubines were  present  at  the  Persian  feasts).  It 
is  clear  that  the  luxurious  Babylonians  were 
even  more  lax  in  the  observance  of  a  strict  eti- 
quette, from  Herod,  i.  191  ;  Xenophon.  Cyriyji., 
V.  2.  28,  and  especially  from  Curtius.  V.  1 ,  38. 
From  this  may  appear  the  propriety  with  which 
Bertholdt  (p.  3(10),  on  the  strength  of  v.  10  of 
this  chapter,  which  he  misunderstood,  charges 
ignorance  of  the  Babylonian  custom  in  question 
on  the  prophet. — Verse  3.  Then  they  brought 
the  golden  vesssls  that  were  taken  out  of  the 
temple  of  the  house  of  God  which  was  at 
Jerusalem.  Merely  the  golden  vtunii')  are  here 
mentioned,  while  the  silver  ones  are  omitted,  on 
the  principle  a  piitionfit  dtiumiinatio.  The  tem- 
ple" (iS^^^D)  in  this  place,  as  in  1  Kings  vi.  3; 
Ezek.  xli.  4.  is  the  temple  proper,  consisting  of 
the  holy  and  the  most  holy  place,  and  is  here 
di.stinguished  from  the  "  house  of  God,"  i.e.,  the 
whole  of  the  sacred  area  of  the  temple. — Verse 
4.  They  drank  wine,  and  praised,  etc.  T"?'.VS 
(with  s  prosthet. ,  Winer,  Gramm.,  %  23,  note 
I)  resumes  the  '"^"r'*!  of  the  preceding  verse 
supplemerted  by  '*■)'?'!',  "wine,"  in  order  to 
"onnect  immediately  with  it  the  praising  of  the 


gods,  and  thus  to  present  in  a  striking  maimei 
the  profanity  and  lasciviousness  of  the  scene.  * 
— On  the  six-fold  number  of  the  materials  from 
which  the  idols  were  constructed,  "gold,  silver, 
brass,  iron,  wood,  and  stone."  compare  the  simi- 
lar number  ("  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  wood, 
hay  stubble")  in  1  Cor.  iii.  11  ;  rdso  Psa.  cxv. 
5-7  ;  Bar.  vi.  7  et  seq.  ;  Wisd.  xv.  15.  f  On  the 
number  itself,  as  the  number  of  the  world  amen- 
able to  judgment  because  of  its  hostility  to  God, 
cf.  Auberlen,  Dan.,  p.  304  et  seq.  ;  and  my 
Theohyid  natiiralix,  p.  8Hi  et  seq. — The  aggra- 
vated feature  of  this  profanation  of  the  sacred 
vessels  of  the  temple  does  not  consist  in  the 
"  placing  of  Jehovah  and  the  idols  of  the  king 
upon  the  same  level "  (Hiivemick),  but  in  the 
fact,  which  Daniel  mentions  with  censure  in  v. 
23,  that  Belshazzar  proudly  exalted  himself 
above  the  God  of  Israel,  and  in  mockery  em- 
ployed the  vessels  stolen  from  His  sanctuary  to 
drink  mne  whUe  singing  the  praises  of  the  vic- 
torious gods  of  Babylon  It  was  thus  essentially 
an  exaltation  of  the  idok  abnre  Jehovah,  who  had 
succumbed  to  them  in  battle,  and  whom  they 
had  despoiled  (cf .  Kranichf.  on  this  passage). 

Verses  .'),  6.  The  fingeron  theueUl,  and  the  cor^ 
sequent  terror  of  the  king.  In  the  same  hour, 
therefore  while  the  sacrilegious  act  was  in  pro- 
gress ;  immediately  and  suddenly.  Cf .  chap 
iii.  6. — Came  forth  fingers  of  a  man's  hand. 
The  Kethib  ^pC:  (3  plur.  masc.)  is  sulEciently 
explained  by  its  position  before  the  feminine 
subject  15i^?<,  or  also  by  the  supposition  that 
the  mind  of  the  wTiter  reverted  in  an  indefinite 
manner  to  the  Divine  powers  here  engaged. 
The  feminine  plural  ~P.^',  substituted  for  it  by 
the  Keri,  is  therefore  to  be  rejected,  as  .<m  easier 
reading  (similar  to  that  in  chap.  ii.  33).  The 
participle  l^"'?"!  ("^■^d  writing,"  instead  of 
"and  wrote  "),  which  follows  the  verb  1p?-.,  has 
a  realizing  effect,  as  in  ch.ip.  ii.  7a;  iii.  9  a. — 
Over  against  the  candlestick  on  the  waU  of 
the  king's  palace.  The  wall  of  the  banquet- 
hall  was  not  panelled  nor  draped,  but  rather  a 
simple,  light-colored  "wall  of  lime  or  plaster  " 
(iri3  =  the  irriS  of  the  Targums).  such  as  the 
ruins  of  the  palaces  at  Nineveh  still  exhibit  in 
great  number,  according  to  Layard  (JS'in.  and 
Babylon,  p.  051).  Upon  a  spot  of  this  wall  that 
was  especially  exposed  to  the  light  from  the 
lamp  above  the  king,  he  suddenly  beheld  the 
mysterious  and  terrifying  phenomenon  of  the 
hand  engaged  in  writing. — And  the  king  saw 
the  part  (the  extremity)  of  the  hand  that 
wrote.  ^<~■)  "5  properly  designates  here  and 
in  V.  24  the  "extremity  of  the  hand,"  probably 


*  ["As  the  city  WHS  alrcirly  besief?ei,t.  and  the  reai  king 
Naboniied  hail  pone  into  the  tieid  apaiust  the  armies  ol 
the  Meiles  and  Persians  under  CjTiis.  the  sense  of  .security 
which  this  feast  implied  must  be  aceountx-d  for  by  theii 
confidence  in  the  a.ssumed  strenjrth  of  the  city.  Plainly  it 
was  supposed  txi  lie  absolutely  impregnable . — It  may  tx 
added  that  God  ha(t  given  up  the  kinp  and  the  prir.ees  t* 
a  blind  infatuation,  of  such  sort  as  usually  precedes  de- 
Btrnetion." — Co/rlen.  ] 

t  [-The  si.K  predicates  of  the  gods  are  divided  by  the 
copula  1  into  two  classes  ;  gold  and  silver — brass,  iron,  wiod, 
and  stone,  in  order  Ki  repre..,ent  before  the  eyes  in  an  ad 
vuncing  degree  the  varietj  of  these  gods."' — Kei   1 


CHAP.  V.  1-30. 


127 


inclnding  the  fingers,  honce  what  the  first  sen- 
tence describes  by  IJ^^S.  The  rendering  of 
Gesenius  and  Dietrich  in  the  HandwOrterbuch, 
"palm  of  the  hand.  pKlnta."  is  hardly  correct ; 
nor  is  that  of  Hitzig,  who.  in  connection  with 
Saadia,  takes  S~"  in  the  wider  sense  of  "'  the 
lower  arm,  including  the  hand."  and  hence  ex 
plains  XTi'IE  hy  "  the  whole  hand."  The 
writer  appears  rather  to  have  employed  the 
words  "  lingers  "  and  "  extremity  of  the  hand  " 
interchangeably,  with  design, — "in  order  to 
excite  more  efEectually  the  conception  of  a  mys- 
terious person  in  the  background,  by  the  obser- 
vation that  only  the  extremity  of  the  organ  em- 
ployed in  writing  was  visible "  (Kranichfeld). 
Whether  the  phenomenon  of  the  mysterious 
band  is  to  be  placed  solely  to  the  account  of 
"the  fancy  of  the  king  under  the  influence  of 
wine."  and  therefore  to  be  reduced  (with  Kran- 
ichfeld )  from  an  objective  and  actually  transpir- 
ing miracle  to  a  merely  subjective  apprehension 
(similar  to  the  perception  of  the  fourth  person  in 
the  fiery  furnace — see  on  chap.  iii.  24),  or  other- 
wise, depends  entirely  on  the  other  question, 
whether  the  mysterious  writing  on  the  wall, 
which  certainly  was  visible  to  others  as  well  as 
to  Belshazzar  (cf.  vs.  7,  8,  IG,  25),  is  to  be 
regarded  as  having  been  previously  carved  or 
painted  in  a  natural  way  and  by  human  agency, 
or  whether  it  is  to  be  accepted  that  the  inscrip- 
tion was  made  by  supernatural  intervention  at 
the  time  of  the  lianquet  and  before  the  eyes  of 
the  terrified  king.  In  support  of  the  former 
theory  reference  might  perhaps  be  made  to  the 
distinction  between  an  older  and  a  later  cunei- 
form writing  among  the  Babylonians,  the  former 
of  which  differed  materially  from  the  latter,  or 
even  to  the  hieroglyphics  which  the  primitive 
Babylonians  are  said  to  have  emploj-ed  (cf.  Spie- 
gel. Art.  Ninete  u.  Ansyrieii.  in  Herzog's  Re^d- 
Eiioykl. ,  vol.  XX.  p.  2:j-t  et  seq. ),  but  with  which 
the  later  ages  were  entirely  unacquainted.  It 
is  conceivable  that  the  king  may  suddenly  have 
noticed  an  inscription  in  characters  of  that 
former  time,  that  were  traced  on  bricks  and  in- 
serted in  the  wall,  and  that  such  characters  were 
not  intelligible  to  the  ordinary  magians  of  the 
time,  but  required  the  all-surpassing  knowledge 
of  Daniel  to  decipher.  But.  aside  from  the  evi- 
dent design  of  the  narrator  to  report  a  positively 
miraculous  incident,  this  theory  is  militated 
against  and  positively  overthrown  by  the  luftiwe 
of  the  icritind.  which  does  not  bear  the  charac- 
ter of  the  primitive  oracles  of  the  kind  repre- 
sented by  the  Sibyl  lines,  but  is  a  Divine  sentence 
of  destniction  upon  the  king  and  his  people, 
that  was  called  forth  by  the  insolent  presump- 
tion of  the  present  ruler,  and  is  adapted  to  the 
circumstances  of  his  time  icf.  on  v.  25  et  .seq.). 
The  theory  of  an  actual  miracle  is  therefore  to 
be  received,  and  the  psychological  explanation 
cited  .ibove.  as  well  as  every  other  naturalistic 
theory,  must  be  rejected.* — Then  the  (color  of 
the)  liin5's  countenance  was  changed  ;  liter- 
ally, "Then  the  king,  his  color  was  changed  to 
him."     ["  **?"  (the  king)    stands   absolutely, 

•  fThc  appearance  of  the  fin?ers  "immediately  awak- 
sned  the  thought  that  the  •^■r^ting  was  by  a  supernatural 
being,  and  alarmed  the  king  out  of  his  intoxication.^* — 
KtU.\ 


because  the  impression  made  by  the  occurrenca 
on  the  king  is  to  be  depicted  "  ( Keil).  ]  The  in- 
transitive ^«:3  ("to  change")  has  the  accusa- 
tive suffix  in  ^~^"■2,  instead  of  the  dative ;  cf. 
"'rn^'ra  in  the  Heb.  of  Ezek.  xlvii.  7.  However, 
the  more  circumstantial  expression  "l"^"  "^"'l''' 
^ni^5.  T.  9,  has  substantially  the  same  signifi- 
cation, as  is  the  case  also  with  the  somewhat 
different  expressions  in  v.  10  and  chap.  vii.  28. 
On  ^""."^  see  on  chap.  iv.  33. — And  his  thoughts 
troubled  him ;  "^irinsi,  the  imcomfortable  and 
terrifying  thoughts  concerning  the  meaning  of 
the  writing,  which  sprang  from  the  guilty  con- 
science of  the  king.  Cf.  chap.  ii.  30. — The 
joints  of  his  loins  were  loosed,  and  his  knees 
smote  one  against  another.  The  tremuloufc 
knocking  together  of  the  knees  is  a  consequence 
of  the  yielding  of  the  joints  of  the  loins,  and 
this  again,  like  the  change  of  color  in  the  coun- 
tenance, is  the  natur.al  effect  of  terror.*  Cf. 
with  7rr',  "hip,  loin,"  the  etymologically  equiv- 
alent Heb.  v;n  (only  in  the  dual,  3"^;n). 
SI:1S"1S,  "knee,"  appears  not  to  be  etymologi- 
cally related  to  -i^;,  c-;il,  but  rather  to  sigm- 
fy  originally  "combination,  amimmtirv ;  "  cf. 
cumrimtiurei  genu,  Plin..  U.  X.,  XI.  lO'i. 

Verses  7-9.  The  useless  mnsiiltntioii  with  tJu 
Magians.  The  king  cried  aloud  j  i^n^,  "  with 
power,"  as  in  chap.  iii.  4  ;  iv.  11. — To  bring  in 
the  astrologers  (soothsayers),  the  Chald8eai.&, 
and  the  soothsayers  (astrologers).  Several 
classes  of  wise  men  are  here  mentiouftd  to  desig- 
nate the  entire  number,  as  in  chap.  ii.  2  (cf.  27) 
and  in  iv.  4  ;  and  among  them  the  Chartummin 
or  learned  class  (see  on  chap.  ii.  2).  whose  wisdom 
would  be  especially  required  in  the  present  in- 
stance, are  not  even  mentioned  by  name.  This 
is  evidently  an  oversight  on  the  part  of  the 
writer,  which  is  paralleled  in  the  somewhat 
more  complete  enumeration  of  the  piiucipal 
classes  of  Magians  in  v.  11.  and  also  in  the  ab- 
breviated expression.  "  the  wise  men,  the  sooth- 
sayers," in  V.  15.  The  indefinite  ^33  ^?:^:n  in 
this  verse,  and  the  expression  i^SJIp  "'^'^rH  3^ 
in  V.  8,  show  clearly  that  the  author  always 
refers  to  all  the  wise  men.  without  excluding 
any  of  the  chief  classes,  and  especially  so  in  this 
instance.  But  it  cannot  be  required  here,  any 
more  than  in  the  similar  case  mentioned  in  the 
preceding  chapter,  that  Daniel  should  have  at 
once  presented  himself  am^ng  all  these  wise  men 
of  Babylon  (see  on  iv.  5).  The  position  of  the 
great  Jewish  wise  man  under  Nebuchadnezzar's 
reign,  which  was  not  official  in  the  more  limited 
sense,  was  probably  continued  to  him  under  Bel- 
shazzar ;  and,  moreover,  the  latter,  who.  accord- 
ing to  V.  11  et  seq..  knew  little  or  nothing  about 
Daniel,  would  bt»  far  more  likely  than  was  his 
father  to  ignore  the  prophet  of  Jehovah,  and  to 

*  ["  It  is  an  appalling  scene  w'len  a  sinning  mortal 
knows  that  the  great  God  has  come  tr.  meet  him  in  the 
very  midst  of  his  Bins ! — How  chj.nffed  the  8i;eu,.  *rom  th* 
glee  of  his  blasphemous  reveliT  ro  this  palenene  uf  cheek, 
convulsion  of  frame,  iemor?c  o."  jon:.rieuce,  and  dread  for& 
boding  of  doom  !  Many  a  sipaer  Las  had  a  like  experi 
ence,  and  other  thousands  mu&f  r*,<j  itl"' — Coic^.l 


I -28 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


geek  the  counsel  of  the  heathen  wise  men  at  the 
outset.  The  words  of  the  queen  in  v.  11  et  seq. 
by  no  means  indicate  that  the  king  was  wholly 
unacquainted  with  Daniel,  but  merely  that  up 
to  that  time  no  personal  or  official  intercourse 
had  taken  place  between  them.  This  circum- 
Btance  also  finds  a  sufficient  explanation  in  the 
greater  freedom  of  action  incident  to  the  partly 
official  and  partly  private  station  of  Daniel,  which 
devolved  on  him  the  oblig-ation  to  attend  to  cer- 
tain portions  of  "the  king's  business"  indeed 
{see  chap.  viii.  27),  but  released  him  from  the 
duty  of  frequently  presenting  himself  before  the 
king.  The  assumption  of  Hengstenberg  and 
Hiivei-nick,  that  on  the  accession  of  Belshazzar 
Daniel  was  formally  deprived  of  his  office  as  the 
chief  Magian,  is  a  very  doubtful  supposition,  and 
stands  in  direct  contradiction  to  chap.  viii.  27 
(cf  viii.  1)  — Whosoever  shall  read  this  writ- 
ing, etc.  n~r2  (here  and  v.  15),  for  '^^f)?,  v. 
8,  16,  25,  appears  to  be  the  orthography  of  a 
later  copyist,  as  in  the  case  of  n33,  chap.  iv. 
82.  and  of  n"irS  in  v.  13,  below.  — Shall  be 
clothed  with  purple  (marg. )  and  have  (rather 
"with"*)  a  chain  of  gold  about  his  neck. 
VJIS  here,  and  in  the  Chaldaizing  Heb.  of  2 
Chron.  ii.  6,  equivalent  to  the  Heb.  Tpal**  (Ex. 
XXV.  26,  27,  and  often),  the  "red  or  genuine 
purple,"  Tzopiirpn^  was  probably  more  costly  and 
brilliaEt  than  the  violet  or  blue  purple  n^.2t|ii 
from  which  it  must  be  distinguished.  It  formed 
the  distinguishing  feature  of  clothing  among  the 
Persian  kmgs  (Pollux,  VII.  13),  and  was  by  them 
occasionally  bestowed  on  high  officials,  as  a  mark 
of  especial  favor  and  exalted  dignity;  e.g.,  on 
Mordecai,  Esth.  viii.  15  ;  and  on  the  piD'pvrati, 
i.e..  persons  who  were  adorned  \vith  the  purple 
iCTi't/i'f,  whom  Xenophon(.4n«i.,  I.  5,8),  Curtius 
(III.  2,  10  ;  VIII.  3, 15  ;  XIII.  13,  14),  and  others 
mention  (cf.  Xenophon,  Cprop. .  I.  3,  2  ;  II.  4, 
0;  Herodotus,  III.  20,  etc.).  Purple  was  pro- 
bably the  badge  of  distinguished  rank  at  the 
Babylonian  as  well  as  at  the  Persian  court,  espe- 
cially as  Babylon,  like  Tyre,  was  celebrated 
among  the  ancients  for  its  manufacture  of  pur- 
ple goods.  Cf.  Philostralus,  Np. ,  27 ;  Ezek. 
xxvii.  24 ;  Josh.  vii.  21 ;  and  generally,  Heereu, 
Ideen.  etc  ,  I.  2,  205  el  seq.  With  respect  to 
their  etymology,  both  forms,  pans  and  pais, 
may  be  most  readily  derived  from  the  Sanscrit, 
in  which  both  rdffiimaii  and  rdgavan  occur  as 
adjectives  derived  from  rdga,  '-red,"  and  sig- 
nify 'Ted-colored;"  cf.  Gesen.,  Addit.  ad  The- 
lai'i?:,  p.  111.  Hitzig  however  refers  to  the 
Sanscr.  argh  =  "'  to  possess  value,  be  costly," 
and  most  of  the  older  expositors  prefer  a  Shem- 
itic  root,  e.g.  23n-— ''^^•'^C,  "chain,  necklace" 
(Sept.  and  Theodot.,  /lavinKT/r  ■  also  Aquil.  and 
Symm .  on  Gen.  xh.  42),  seems  not  to  have  been 
changed  to  S2^:':n  (=  Gr.  /xavidKr/c),  the  form 
which  is  here  and  in  vs.  16  and  29  preferred  by 
the  Keri.  As  among  the  early  Egyptians  (Gen. 
xli.  42^,  so  also  among  the  later  Persians  the 

•  [The  phrase  Sai  ^l  sailTini  "does  not  depend 
on  dx"',  but  forms  a  clause  by  itself ;  aiid  a  chain  of 
gold  ftltall  be  about  his  neck.''^.-  &'£)/,] 


golden  necklace  served  as  the  ornament  of  princea 
and  as  the  mark  of  special  favor  from  the  king, 
cf.  Herod. ,  III.  20  ;  Xenophon,  Aimb.,  I.  2,  27  ; 
5,  8 ;  8.  29.— And  shall  be  the  third  ruler  in 
the  kingdom  ;  rather,  "  shall  have  power  in  the 
kingdom  as  a  triumvir."     'P-r-;',  not  the  same 
as  S«PbP,  vs.  16  and  29,  is  generally  regarded  as 
an  ordinal  number,  "the  third,"  formed  aft«r 
the. Heb.    analogy,   and   is   compared  with  the 
more   usual  "'H'^iP  ;    but  it  may  perhaps,   and 
with  greater  probability,  be  regarded,  with  Kran- 
ichfeld,  as  a  feminine  adverbial  formation  after 
the  analogy  of  adverbs  like  n^O"JH,   ''^.~.'*,  etc., 
and  be  rendered  accordingly,  by  like,  or  as  a  tri- 
umvir ;  while  xri.ri  in   vs.   16   and     29  is  the 
corresponding     masculine      noun      "triumvir" 
(formed  from  srjp,  "three").    There  is  there- 
fore no  difference    in   sense  between  the  term 
employed  in  this  passage  and  those  found  in  the 
parallel  verses  cited   above ;  but  it  is  unneces- 
sary and  arbitrary  to  declare,  with  Hitzig,  that 
the  two  forms  are  identical,  and  on  that  account 
to  substitute  "'BiP  in  this  place.     The  dignity 
of  triumvir  which  is  here  promised  to  the  for- 
tunate interpreter  of   the  mystery  is  probably 
not  identical  with  the  office  of  one  of  the  three 
governors  of  the  province  of  Babylon  mentioned 
in  chap.   ii.  49,  but  designates  the  position  of 
one  of  the  three  chief  governors  over  the  whole 
kingdom.     The  latter  office  is  noticed  in  chap, 
vi.  3,  as  established  by  Darius  the  Mede  ;  but 
that  statement  may  be  regarded  as  merely  indi- 
cating the  restorption  of  a  feature  in  the  admin- 
istration   of    government    which    had    already 
existed  under  the  Babylonian  regime.    The  Sept. 
presents  the  correct  idea :  iinvoni  rob  zpi-ov  //j/jui'c 
ri/i;  ikiai'/tinc: ;  but  the  Peshito  is  less  correct  in 
its  rendering  by  "the  third  rank  in  the  king- 
dom," which  results  in  the  idea  that  the  recipi- 
ent  should   immediately   succeed   in   rank   the 
king,  who  was  supreme,  and  the  prime  minister 
or  grand  vizier,  who  fiUed  the  second  place  in 
the  kingdom.     This  thought  was  certainly  for- 
eign to  the  author,  and  would  be  expressed  aa 
indefinitely  as  is  possible  by    "'^T  "'PtP"'..     The 
evident  meaning  of  these  words  is  rather  that 
the   person    concerned   should  be   placed   over 
the  kingdom  airof  rpiroi;,  or  the  third  beside  two 
other   grand  officials  or  T?^^?   (cf-    chap.    vi. 
3). — Verse  8.   Then  came  in  all  the  king's  wise 
men.     On  the  Keri  V^T  see  on  chap.  iv.  4.     The 
SSia  ■■)a^Sn  is    are    evidently   the    same    as 
those  mentioned   separately   (although   not  ex- 
haustively,   and   merely   by   way   of  indicating 
their  office)  in  v.  7.     Kranichfeld  is  exceedingly 
arbitrary  when  he  assumes  a  gradation  between 
the  three  classes  of  wise  men  who  are  specially 
mentioned  in  v.   7,  and  the  summoning  of   (lii 
the  wise  men  related  in  this  passage,  and  con- 
sequently finds  between  the  lines  and  preceding 
the  T^l?<.,  "then,"  a  series  of  incidents  that  are 
not    expressly   noticed    (after    the   manner    in 
which     many   expositors    treat    the     mj'    tlrrcv 
6  (iof/of ,  Luke  xiv.  22).     Instead  of  this  compare 
the  relation  of  the  general  expression  "'^"'3'?  33 


CHAP.  V.  1-30. 


12f. 


i33  in  chap.  ir.  3,  to  the  special  classes  of  wise 
men  which  are  immediately  referred  to  (ibid.  v. 
4).  and  also  what  has  been  observed  above,  on 
V.  7,  in  relation  to  the  careless  stj-le  of  the  au- 
tb'>r. — Bat  they  could  not  read  the  ■writing, 
etc.  Krauichfeld  supposes  that  the  reason  for 
this  was,  that  the  mj-sterious  inscription  was 
written  in  the  old  Phojnician  characters,  which 
Daniel,  being  a  Hebrew,  would  have  recog-nized, 
while  the  Chaldaian  Chiirtinnmi/i,  who  were 
acquainted  only  with  the  character  in  use  among 
the  ancient  Babylonians,  which  corresponded  to 
the  later  Syriac  or  Palm3'rene,  would  naturally 
be  unable  to  understand  them.  But  in  this  in- 
stance we  are  probably  to  conceive  of  cuneiform 
writing,  or  ef  hieroglyphic  characters  (see  on  v. 
7).  because  the  brick  walls  of  the  palaces  in 
ancient  Babylon  generally  contained  only  such. 
Prideaux,  however,  preceded  Kranichfeld  in  the 
opinion  expressed  in  the  Unicersnl  HiUory,  part 
III.  p.  755,  that  the  writing  was  not  composed 
of  the  square  characters  in  use  among  the  Chal- 
daeans,  but  of  the  ancient  Arabic  (?),  which  pre- 
ceded the  modem  Samaritan.  * — Verse  9.  Then 
V7as  king  Belshazzar  greatly  troubled  .... 
and  his  lords  were  aston-shed.  The  unusual, 
and  even  unique  and  incomprehensible  charac- 
ters in  which  the  suddenly  apparent  writing  was 
ccmposed,  increased  the  alarm  produced  by  the 
apparition,  and  filled  the  king  and  his  guests, 
now  thoroughly  aroused  from  their  wild  debauch, 
with  anxious  dread  in  relation  to  the  misfortunes 
predicted  by  the  supposed  oracle.  If,  with  Hav- 
eraick,  and  many  earlier  expositors,  we  could  be- 
lieve that  Belshazzar's  feast  was  held  during  the 
siege  of  the  city  bv  the  Medo- Persians,  and  with 
a  design  to  ridicule  the  danger  from  that  source, 
it  would  be  still  easier  to  explain  so  general  an 
alarm,  and  it  would  not  even  be  necessary,  in 
that  case,  to  allude  to  the  fear  of  thf  many  offi- 
cials that  their  own  deposition  from  office  might 
1)6  connected  with  the  king's  impending  fall ;  but 
ihat  conclusion  does  not  necessarily  result  from 
T.  30  et  seq. — Hitzig  remarks  on  the  Ithpael 
Part.  Vf"?"''r'2,  and  probably  with  justice,  that 
''  it  not  only  comprehends  the  idea  of  alarm,  but 
also  that  of  confusion  and  e.xcited  movement." 
"None  retained  their  places;  a  general  uproar 
ensued ;  groups  were  formed ;  and  the  people 
talked,  .ind  ran  hither  and  thither  to  no  pur- 
pose." 

Verses  10-13.  The  queen-nwtJier  refers  BiUiaz- 
ear  to  Daniel.  Now  (or  "then")  the  queen 
.  .  .  came  into  the  banquet-house.  KllSi'a 
can  only  be  the  queen-mother  (rT1"':3,  1  Kings 
XV,  1-3  ;   2  Chron.  xv.  16  ;  cf.  Jer.  xiii.  18)— not 

*  ["  But  thi^  interpretation  of  the  miracle  on  natural 
principles  is  quite  erroneous.  First,  it  is  ver}'  unlikely  th.it 
the  ChaMmnn  wise  men  should  not  have  known  these  old 
Shemitic  characters,  even  although  at  that  time  they  had 
ceased  to  be  in  current  use  amouR  the  Babylonians  in  their 
common  writing.  Then,  from  the  circumstance  that  Daniel 
coul  i  at  once  read  the  writing,  it  docs  not  follow  that  it 
«as  the  welt-known  Old-Hebrew  writing  of  hie  father- 
land. 'The  characters  employed  in  the  writinp,' as  Heng- 
dtenberg  has  rightly  observed  {Ileitr.,  I.  p.  122),  'must 
have  been  altogether  unusual,  so  a?;  not  to  be  deciphered 
but  by  Piv  ne  illuniination.'  Yet  we  must  not,  with  M. 
G<?ier  and  other.-.,  assume  that  the  writing  wa,s  visible 
only  to  the  king  and  Daniel.  Thi.i  contradicts  the  text, 
according  to  which  the  ChaldiEaUrWise  men.  and,  without 
doubt,  all  that  were  present,  also  saw  the  truces  of  the  writ^ 
Ing,  but  were  not  able  t/j  read  it." — i.'si7.] 


one  of  the  king's  wives;  for,  according  to  vs.  3 
and  23  these  were  already  in  the  banquet-hall 
among  the  carousers.  Hence,  if  Belshazzar  wa.s 
the  same  person  as  Evil-merodach.  the  son  and 
successor  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  this  queen-mother, 
who  here  evidently  displays  a  dignity  and  au- 
thority such  as  belonged  to  the  yibiroth  at  the 
Israelitish  courts  (cf.  the  passages  adduced),  was 
probably  the  Nitocris  whom  Herodotus  celebrates 
in  I.  185.  Cf.  the  Introd.,  §  8,  note  3.* — Instead 
of  the  Kethib  nib?,  the  Keri,  conforming  to  the 
usage  of  the  later  Chaldee,  has  r35  ;  cf.  on 
chap.  iv.  4. —  "i31  'a  ''i'p  i-rf.^,  "by  reason  (on 
account)  of  the  words  of  the  king  and  his  lords." 
So  the  majority  of  moderns,  correctly;  for  a 
confused.  e.xcited  talking,  whose  sound  possibly 
penetrated  to  the  apartments  of  the  queen- 
mother,  is  implicitly  included  in  ii^^fwai  ^• 
9.  The  plural  V?"?,  as  well  as  the  complemen- 
tary genitive,  is  opposed  to  the  version  of  the 
Vulg. ,  Luther,  Bertholdt,  Dereser,  von  Lengerke, 
etc.  :  "  by  reason  of  the  matter,  or  the  affair." — 
O  king,  live  for  ever.  Cf.  on  chap.  ii.  4,  where 
also  the  defective  '^1'^\'\  "^-^"^^l  has  been  no- 
ticed.— Verse  11.  And  in  the  days  of  thy 
father  light  ("^^n:,  cf.  on  chap.  ii.  23),  and 
understanding,  and  wisdom,  like  the  wisdom 
of  the  gods,  was  found  in  him.  Cf.  1  Kings  iii. 
28;  Wisd  viii.  11. — King  Nebuchadnezzar, 
the  king,  thy  father.  The  subject  is  briefly 
repeated  at  the  close  of  the  sentence,  because 
its  first  position  was  somewhat  distant  from  the 
verb,  similar  to  Cant.  v.  7. — Verse  12.  Foras- 
much as  an  excellent  spiiit  .  .  .  were  found 
in  the  same  Daniel.  The  wisdom  of  Daniel, 
which  had  been  e.xtolled  in  v.  11,  is  again  men- 
tioned as  the  reason  for  the  distinction  conferred 
on  him  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  for  the  purpose  of 
preparing  Belshazzar  to  listen  to  the  counsel 
which  follows. — Interpreting  of  dreams,  and 
showing  of  hard  sentences  and  dissolving  of 
doubts  ;  rather,  "  to  interpret  dreams,  show  rid- 
dles, and  loosen  knots."  This  triplicate  circum- 
stantial clause, — the  first  and  third  of  whose 
members  are  expressed  in  the  He'.i.  [Chald.  ]  by 
participles,  and  the  second  by  the  infinitive 
S'J'ins — is  a  genitive,  depending  on  ^rfibpipii 
which  closes  the  series  of  objects  governed  by 
the  principal  verb  rnrPCn  in  the  maimer  of  a 
parenthesis.  Hitzig  holds  differently,  taking 
the  three  terms  '"iEa,  >«"J";ns«,  and  »<T.?a,  un- 
der the  precedence  of  the  Vulgate,  as  three 
nouns  of  action,  coordinated  to  the  preceding 
ones  ("an  excellent  spirit,  knowledge,  and  un- 
derstanding "),  and  consequently  assuming  six 
subjects    to     ~a  rn;ri"rn.       But    "■•3??p     and 


*  ["The  '  queen  '  in  this  passage  is  the  queen-mother,  aa 
may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  the  kiug'a  (Belshazzar'8> 
wives  and  concubines  are  \vith  him  in  his  carousals,  while 
this  woman  was  not  :«and  also  from  her  intimate  acquain- 
tance with  Daniel  and  the  inciiients  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
life.  She  was  probably  the  daughter  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
and  the  mother  of  Belshazzar." — Co>r[en.  If  Rawlmson> 
conjecture  {/feriittnlun  i.  4^1  be  correct,  that  the  real  king 
Nabonadus  had  lift  his  sun  Belshazzar  temporarily  In 
charge  of  Babylon,  this  woman  may  have  really  been  tll# 
consort  of  the  actual  king.] 


130 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


S^-";  are  clearly  Pael  participles,  and  they 
cannot  be  taken  as  nnmina  aetionis,  even  under 
reference  to  the  Heb.  "?:'?,  "a  covering,"  or 
to  ■":"■:,  chap.  ix.  27.  It  is  exceedingly  doubt- 
ful whether  the  figurative  expression  "  to  loosen 
knots "  (cf.  the  Lat.  nodos  solrere ;  and  also 
Seneca's  '•  iwdom  mrtis  ■verba,'"  (Edip.,  101) 
contains  an  illusion  to  the  '"looseniag  of  the 
loins,"  in  v.  6  (as  Hitzig,  Kranichfeld,  etc., 
assert),  or  not,  in  view  of  the  merely  superficial 
relation  between  st.:."^  and  iiiri-73. — 1°  •  •  • 
Daniel  -whom  the  king  named  Belteshazzcir  j 
;s«':~S  ns  (cf.  v.  30),  an  emphatic  pleonasm. 
The  giving  of  the  name  is  referred  to,  as  in 
chap.  iv.  5.  as  something  honorable  to  the  pro- 
phet.— NoTW  let  Daniel  be  called,  and  he  ■will 
show  the  interpretation.  Concerning  the  form 
mt;:^,  see  above,  on  v.  7.  ["  The  tone  in 
which  this  last  clause  is  spoken  betokens  that 
the  speaker  herself  is  conscious  of  an  elevated 
rank  and  a  kind  of  authority,  or,  at  least,  a  right 
to  give  advice  ;  a  tone  which  only  such  a  woman 
as  stood  in  the  relation  of  a  mother  (not  a  wife) 
could  assume  in  the  East  before  a  king " 
(Stuart).] 

Verses  13-16.  DanieVs  appearance  before  the 
king.  Then  was  Daniel  brought  in  before  the 
king,  ^v."  ^'"l  ^^^n  are  Hebraizing  Hophal- 
forms,  like  P^1~,  chap.  iv.  33,  or  like  ~^'-~  in 
v.  20. — Art  thou  that  Daniel,  which  art  of  the 
children  of  the  captivity  of  Judah,  etc. 
['•The  question  did  not  expect  an  answer,  and  has 
this  meaning  :  Thou  art  indeed  Daniel^ — Keil.] 
This  question  clearlj'  indicates  that  no  direct  in- 
tercourse had  hitherto  taken  place  between  the 
king  and  D.miel  (see  on  v.  7).  but  also,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  the  former  had  some  knowledge 
of  the  prophet.  The  use  of  the  name  Daniel 
instead  of  Belteshazzar,  in  the  king's  address, 
was  probably  dictated  simply  by  a  desire  to 
avoid  the  use  of  a  name  so  nearly  identical  in 
sound  to  his  own — although  it  certainly  be- 
longed to  the  prophet  in  the  official  language  of 
the  Babylonian  court.  Hitzig  therefore  com- 
mits a  decided  error,  when  he  assumes  ahistorical 
improbability  in  this  place,  suggestive  of  a  later 
Jewish  authorship. — -Whom  the  king  .... 
brought  from  (nather  "hitherto,  out  of") 
Jewry  ?  T""  "~  is  probably  to  be  referred  to 
the  captives,  as  Theodotion.  the  Sept.,  Luther, 
Hitzig,  etc..  hold,  and  not  specially  to  the  per- 
son of  Daniel,  which  is  the  view  of  the  Vulgate, 
Kranichfeld,  etc.  On  the  form  ^2St  for  "^X 
(cf.  the  voc.  S^X  =  'A,S3(!,  Rom.  viii.  15),  see 
Hitzig,  Kranichfeld,  and  others,  on  this  passage. 
—On  V.  14  cf.  V.  11 ;  on  v.  15  cf.  v.  8.  ["  It 
is  not  to  be  overlooked  that  here  Belshazzar  leaves 
out  the  predicate  holy  in  connection  with  l"'?.;^; 
gods  "  (Keil).] — The  wise  men,, the  astrologers 
("  eoothsiiyers").  On  this  combination  cf.  on  v.  7. 
— That  they  should  read  this  writing,  etc.  "^  'li 
as  the  accompanying  imfierfect  indicates,  is  in 
this  place  the  telic  conjunction  "that,  in  order 
that."     Upon  this  clause  which  indicates  the  de- 


sign, depends  that  which  follows,  construed 
with  5  c.  Inf.  (cf.  ii.  16).  Concerning  the  form 
n:r3  see  supra,  on  v.  7. — But  they  could  not 
shex7  the  interpretation  of  the  thing  (or 
"  word").  S*"!":  cannot  be  rendered  by  "matter, 
thing,"  any  more  than  T3&  in  v.  10  ,  it  rathei 
signifies,  collectively,  the  words  written  on  the 
wall  (against  Hitzig  and  others). — Concerning 
SFibri  V.  16  b.,  see  supra,  on  v.  7. 

Verses  17-24.  DanieVs  cemuring  address  to 
the  king,  as  tJie  prologue  to  the  interpretation  of 
the  imting.  Let  thy  gifts  be  to  thyself.  This 
refusal  of  the  royal  presents  was  designed  merely 
to  decisively  reject,  at  the  outset,  and  in  a  man- 
ner becoming  the  prophet  of  Jehovah,  any  in- 
fluence that  might  be  brought  to  bear  on  him. 
It  is  not,  therefore,  a  pert  expression,  which  the 
king  might  justly  punish,  nor  is  it  inconsistent 
with  the  fact  that  Daniel  ultimately  accepted 
the  reward  offered  for  the  interpretation,  v.  29, 
since  he  regarded  it  as  a  recognition  of  his  God. 
The  assertion  of  v.  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  etc..  that 
we  should  expect  either  that  the  emraged  king 
would  punish  the  prophet  who  bears  evil  tidings 
and  couples  them  with  threatenings  and  cen- 
sure, or  that,  in  v.  20,  Daniel  would  despise  the 
royal  purple  and  the  golden  necklace,  all  this  is 
simply  adapted  to  afford  a  conception  of  the 
manner  in  which  a  Maccabaean  tendency-writer 
would  have  treated  this  historj',  and  of  the 
probable  issue  to  which  he  would  have  conducted 
it. — Verse  18.  O  thou  king,  the  most  high 
God,  etc.  The  absolute  position  of  the  vocative 
SO^Ja  nn:K  at  the  beginning  of  the  sentence, 
places  the  king  rhetorically  in  a  living  relation 
with  the  facts  reported  in  the  following  clause, 
with  regard  to  his  father  Nebuchadnezzar.  — Verse 
19.  And  for  the  majesty  (or  "power  ")  .... 
cill  people,  nations  ("tribes"),  aud  laoguages 
trembled  and  feared;  properly.  "  were  tremb- 
ling and  fearing,"  were  in  a  state  of  fear  and 
trembling.     The  Keri  has  1'?']^  instead  of  T>!!<T, 

similar  to  Vll"^,  (chap.  ii.  38;  iii.  31;  iv.  32) 
instead  of  T"^.'*'^ ;  see  on  ii.  38.  Concerning 
the  triad,  "people,  tribes,  and  tongues,"  see  on 
chap.  iii.  4.-  Whom  (soever)  he  would  (cf. 
Winer,  Grramm.  §  47,  1,  a)  ....  he  kept 
alive,  ''n^  is  derived  by  Theodotion  (IrvTr-tv) 
and  the  Vulgate  (jiercutiebat ;  cf.  Luther,  "ef 
sefdug  ")  from  sna  "to  smite  ;  "  but  the  paral- 
lelism requires  the  Aphel  partic.  of  S*'^'^,  "  to 
live,"  and  Sufi's  must  either  be  considered  as 
such  (namely,  as  a  peculiar,  old-Chaldaic  con- 
traction of  '*"'7'3,  which  is  generally  contracted 

to  "'DP,  '•  ff..  Targ.  Deut.  xxxii.  39),  or,  with 
Saadia,  Rashi,  Buxt.,  Bertholdt,  Gesenius, 
Fiirst,  Hitzig,  etc.,  the  usual  contracted  form 
Hn^  must  be  sub.stituted  for  sn^.  ["  The  bril- 
liant description  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  power  in 
ver.  18  and  19  has  undesirably  the  objeci;  of 
impressing  it  on  the  mind  of  Belshazzar  that  he 
did  not  equal  his  f.ather  (that  monarch)  in  power 
and  majesty  ....  The  last  clause  in  ver.  IP 
remindi  us  "of  1  Sam.  ii.  G.  7  "(.Keil).]  Verse  20 


CHAP.  V.  1-30. 


13] 


But  when  his  heart  was  lifted  up.    D"l  =  cy 

is  a  preterite  with  intransitive  signification,  not 
a  p.issive  partic.  ,asv.  Lengerke  suggests.  Cf. 
W'uier,  §  83,  4. — -And  his  mind  hardened  in 
pride.  H^^,  the  nearest  synonym  to  32l3i  is 
also  frequently  used  interchangeably  witli  it  in 
the  Hebrew,  e.  g.,  Psa.  li.  13,  19.  qp.-,  in  this 
place,  is  about  equivalent  to  the  Heb.  p-;n  in 
Bx.  vii.  13  * — He  was  deposed  .  .  .  ,  and  they 
took  his  glory  from  him;  or,  "  his  glory  was 
taken  from  him."  Inste.ad  of  '*^P''l  the  best 
MSS.  have  ,T~ip"n,  which  is  possibly  to  be  read 
a.s  n"ip"'T   (Hitzig) ;  but  on  the  other  hand  the 

case  may  be  analogous  to  S*".??,  supra,  v.  8  and 
chap.  iv.  15. — Verse  31.  And  his  heart  w^as 
made  like  the  (heart  of)  beasts.  Read  ^Vwi 
not  T^ViT  (Keri)  or  "'l^  C'^-  Leng.,  Hitzig),  or 
even  ^1-  (Ewald).  The  3d  sing,  active  ^Tb 
is  used,  instead  of  the  more  usual  3d  plural 
active,  to  express  an  impersonal  sense.  There 
are  thus  three  several  modes  of  indicating  that 
sense  employed  in  vs.  30  and  31  :  «,  the  passive 
(rn:n  v.  30,  T'lp  v.  31)  ;  b,  the  3d  plural 
active  (1^1?'7  v.  20,  n:3?353-i  v.  21);  c,  the  3d 
sing,  active  C^??  v.  21) — a  rapid  change,  that  is 
conditioned  by  the  rhetorical,  or  if  it  be  pre- 
ferred, the  poetical  elevation  of  Daniel's  re- 
marks. —  [And  his  dwelling  was  with  the 
wild  asses.  This  "  circumstance  is  added  by 
the  speaker,  and  not  found  in  chap.  iv.  39  (33). 
It  is  added  for  the  sake  of  stronger  impression  " 
(A'^wfrt).  l--TiU  he  knew  that  .  .  .  God  .  .  ap- 
pointeth  over  it  (or  "  them  ")  whomsoever  he 
will.  CI.  chap.  iv.  14,  at  the  close  of  which,  as 
here,  the  Keri  substitutes  nb5  for  the  Kethib 
R-^b;  —Verse  33.  And  thou  ....  hast  not 
humbled  thne  heart,  though  thou  knewest 
all  this. f  Properly,  ^^ precisely  becai/se  (*^p",3 
"")  thou  knewest  all  this,"  hence,  because  of  a 
defiant  opposition  to  the  well  known  design  and 
will  of  the  Highest.  The  words  indicate  the 
reason  not  for  what  Belshazzar  should  have 
done,  but  for  what  /le  did  not  perform  (thus 
Kranichf.  correctly,  against  v.  Lengerke,  Hit- 
zig, etc.). — Verse  33.  And  thou  has  praised 
the  gods  of  silver,  and  gold,  etc.,  cf.  v.  4.  The 
descriptive  addition  in  this  case,  "  which  see 
not,  nor  hear,  nor  know,"  is  based  on  Deut.  iv. 
28;  cf.  P.sa.  cxv.  5  et  seq.;  cxxxv.  15  et  seq. — 
And  (rather  "  but ")  the  God  in  whose  hand 


*  ["  The  perpetual  incense  of  flattery,  coupled  with  the 
daily  experience  of  being  dependent  on  no  one,  and  of  hav- 
ing every  one  dependent  upon  himself,  tempts  an  ahsoliite 
monarch  to  feel  himself  almost  a  god. — It  is  fully  time  for 
the  Almighty  to  hiu-1  such  a  hardened  sinner  down." — 
Cmole-:.] 

t  [Keil  argues  that  these  words  *'  place  it  beyond  a  doubt 
that  BeUhazzar  knew  the<;e  incidents  in  the  life  of  Nebuchad- 
nellar,  and  thus  that  he  was  his  son,  since  his  grandson 
(daughter's  son)  could  scarcely  have  been  srtold  that  thef>'r- 
getfulness  of  the  Divine  judgment  could  have  been  charged 
tujainst  him  as  a  sin."  Most  readers,  however,  will  regard 
this  as  a  strained  argument,  for  surely  Belshazzar  had  ample 
means  of  knowing  what  his  grandfather  had  set  forth  by  a 
roy  il  proclamation,  and  these  events  are  here  not  merely  al- 
luded to  as  aggravating  his  sin.  but  rather  by  way  of  con- 
a*asr.  and  possibly  for  an  iuciteuient  to  aimilar  repentance.) 


thy  breath  is.  Cf  Job  xii.  10  ;  Num.  xvi.  22. 
On  the  following,  "  whose  (or  "with  whom") 
are  all  thy  ways"  ("'71*'  ways  =  experiences, 
Targ.  Job  viik  13).  cf.  Jer,  x.  33.— Hast  thOB 
not  glorified;  a  litotes  for.  '•  hast  thou  di» 
honored,  disgraced."  ["  This  is  surely  plai* 
and  faithful  admonition ;  and  probably  tha 
king's  conscience  was  smitten  by  it." — Stuart.} 

—  Verse    24.       Then    (or    -'therefore")     was 

seat  from  him.  1"1S3,  properly  "then,'' 

namely  at  the  time  when  thou  didst  thne 
exalt  thyself  against  God.  The  post  hoc  in 
this  instance  is  really  a  propter  fioc.  —  U^b'.r 
does  not,  as,  e.g.,  in  Ezra  vi.  13  (cf.  the  Heb. 
Dan.  xi.  43),  designate  the  stretching  forth  of 
the  hand,  as  if  God  Himself  were  the  writer  ; 
but  rather  indicates  the  emanation  of  the  hand 
from  God  in  a  general  way.  and  therefore,  so  as 
not  to  exclude  the  intervention  of  angels,  but 
rather  to  presume  it.  Hitzig  remarks  correctly  : 
"  The  hand  that  writes  is  that  of  an  angel  who 
stood  before  God  (chap.  vii.  10),  and  received 
the  commission  to  write  thi.s." 

Verses  35-38.  Tlie  reading  and  interpretation 
of -the  Writing.  Mene,  Mene,  Tekel,  Upharsin 
=  numbered,  mimbered,  ireighed.  and-dividers. 
The  forms  Hp^S,  blTP,  and  also  B^S,  which  in  v. 
38  takes  the  place  of  TP^S,  are  unmistakably 
passive  participles  Peal,  by  which  the  surely- 
impending  future  is  expressed  in  the  manner 
of  a  Prceteritum  propheticnm.  but  with  greater 
brevity  and  emphasis.  The  forcible  laconic 
utterance  of  a  mysterious  oracle  sounds  forth 
from  these  disconnected  consecutive  passive 
participles  ;  and  this  tendency  and  signification 
appear  also  in  the  unusual  and  antique  form  of 
the  participles,  of  which  only  the  first,  S?.?,  has 
a  somewhat  regular  formation  (analogous  to 
"p,  chap.  iii.  36,  or  to  ~~,  for  -"r'^",  in  the 
later  Chaldee),  while  the  «-sound  in  bi?P  and 
275  is  decidedly  abnormal,  and  conflicts  with 
the  ordinary  usage.  bp.~  appears  to  have  been 
selected  as  an  equivocal  mediating  form  between 
b"'PP,  the  regular  passive  participle  of  ii'J.P,  and 
bp_n  (from  vvp^  >.  to  be  light;  "  cf.  v.  27);  S*:'^ 
was  possibly  chosen  because  of  its  assonance  to 
STK?2,  vs.  3  and  33  ;  and  in  like  manner  O'^S 

—  O^IS  may  contain  an  amphibole,  by  way  of 
an  allusion  to  the  name  C~5 — hence  a  reference 
to  the  world-power  which  was  chiefly  instrumen- 
tal in  the  "division,"  i.e.,  the  overthrow  of  the 
Chaldajan  empire.  Kranichfeld  rejects,  but 
without  any  reason,  this  assumption  of  a  de- 
signed two-fold  sense  of  the  terms,  and  espe- 
cially of  Tpy},  which  is  adopted  by  Hitzig  and 
others;  although  Hitzig  is  probably  in  error 
when  he  assigns  to  ^T  (upon  the  ^ound  of  Isa. 
Iviii.  7,  and  in  cormection  with  Ibn-Ezra  and 
Rashi)  the  meaning  of  the  Heb.  '~  or  P"E> 
"to  break."*    As  v.  28  shows,  the  writer  repre- 

•  [Keil  regards  ^*^D"'ID  as  "  a  noan-form,  and  plor.  :< 


13'2 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


sents  the  destruction  of  the  Chalda3an  empire, 
which  is  foretold  in  "^  {T^.'^),  precisely  as  a 
dirmon  between  the  allied  nations  of  the  Per- 
sians and  the.  Mides.  although  he  might  properly 
have  mentioned  the  Persians  only,  as  effecting 
the  destruction  of  the  kingdom.  The  substitu- 
tion of  the  plural  active  partic.  T~'.P  for  tlie 
abnormal  passive  partic.  3"/Q  in  the  written 
oracle  itself,  which  results  in  a  change  of  con- 
struction similar  to  that  observed  in  vs.  20  and 
21  (cf .  also  chap.  ii.  7  ;  iii.  S) ;  vi.  14,  and  the 
remarks  on  P'j'?!<,  chap.  iii.  4),  appears  to  have 
been  made  for  the  sake  of  clearness.  The  un- 
usual 0"?  would  have  accorded  more  exactly 
with  the  two  preceding  terms,  but  would  scarcely 
have  been  intelligible  ;  while  the  plur.  Tp"!?^' 
"and  dividers."  or,  "and  they  divide,"  could 
not  be  misunderstood.  (Ewald's  interpretation  : 
"and  in  pieces  and  in  ruins,"  is  without  any 
linguistic  proof. )  However,  the  expressions  ' '  to 
number  "  or  "  count."  and  "to  weigh  "  are  found 
elsewhere  also,  as  figures  to  designate  a  final 
judicial  determination;  cf.  P.sa.  Ivi.  9;  ixii.  10; 
Job  xxxi.  4,  0.  The  repetition  of  t<';'0  as  indi- 
cating the  character  of  the  entire  sentence,  is 
designed  merely  to  add  a  solemn  emphasis  to 
tTie  words  ;  cf.  the  frequent  nurii',  a/iiiv  Wiyu  vu'iv 
in  the  New  Testament,  and  O.-T.  passages  like 
Gen.  xiv.  10;  Dent.  ii.  27;  xiv.  23,  etc. ;  and, 
generally,  Ewald,  Lehrh.,  %  313  a. — Verse  26. 
God  hath  numbered  thy  kingdom.  'TIDlSia  is 
not  "thy  kingdom,"  but  "thy  kingnhip"  the 
duration  of  thy  reign,  the  days  of  thy  sover- 
eignty. •  The  verb  ".12  is  written  with  ,t  pro- 
bably with  design,  in  order  to  indicate  the  change 
of  the  vowel  as  compared  with  S*.;'?. — And  fin- 
ished it.  "'pbu."".  literally,  "  has  made  it  com- 
plete," or  "has  fully  numbered  it;"  i.e.,  has 
i/iought  it  to  the  end  of  the  time  assigned  to  it. 
•^f.  :"^i"r.";,  Isa  xxxviii.  12. — Verse  27.  Thou  art 
weighed  in  the  balances,  and  art  found  want- 
ing. "Thou."  i.e.,  thy  moral  personality,  thy 
moral  character  and  worth ;  cf.  Job  xxxi.  0  : 
"  Let  me  be  weighed  in  an  even  balance,  that 
God  may  know  mine  integrity." — Thou  "art 
found  wanting  "  seems  to  refer  to  the  threaten- 
ing ~iii5  "r.  "for  thou  art  vile"  (or  "too 
light"),  which  the  prophet  Nahum  (i.  14)  hurls 
at  the  Assyrian  king  ;  and  in  so  far  may  serve 
to  substantiate  what  has  been  observed  above  on 
the  two-fold  sense  of  ipKl.  ~"'s"7,  properly 
"wanting"  (=  "^^il),  namely  in  moral  worth  or 
capacity. — Verse  28.  Thy  kingdom  is  divided, 
and  given  to  the  Medes  and  Persians.  In  re- 
gard to  the   abnormal  form  ""^.S.  which  is  fol- 

0~3  =  Hebr.  O^B  (cf.  iriiS^E,  Zcrh.  xi.  16),  in  the 
■ense  of  broken  pieces,  fragments."    He  adds  that  S<-?3  '*  is 

twice  fivfn  perhaps  only  for  the  sake  of  the  parallelism,  so 
AS  to  inaintiiin  two  members  of  the  verse,  each  of  two 
word=."l 

•  [The  author  is  led  to  this  forced  inten>retation  by  his 
fttttmpL  tr.  iitentify  Belshazzar  with  Evil-mcrodaeb.  ur.d  con- 
lequeiitly  to  defer  the  capture  of  Babylon  beyoail  the  night 
andtr  ooDfilderation.1 


lowed  by  the  regular  fem.  pass,  part.,  rC"^'1& 
see  above,  on  v.  2.5.  God  is  n.aturaUy  conceived 
of  as  the  divider ;  the  related  tribes  of  the 
Medes  and  the  Persians  are  named  as  the  recipi- 
ents, although  the  latter  clearly  appears  as  the 
principal  power.  The  oracle  contains  an  ety- 
mological allusion  to  ~~S  only,  and  none  to 
^~'^,  an  assonance  to  which  might  have  been 
readily  found  in  the  root  t;);,  "to  measure' 
(cf.  --a,  ~:?3,  Ezra  iv.  20;  vi.  8;  vii.  24). 
The  evident  design  with  which  the  Persians,  aa 
the  preponderating  power  in  the  Medo-Persian 
kingdom  (for  only  thus  was  it  known  to  tha 
author,  as  the  comprehensive  V^'^i^l  indicates 
cf.  on  chap.  iL  39),  are  thus  brought  into  prom 
Inence,  is  not  contradicted  by  chap.  vi.  1.  where 
Daiius  the  Mede  is  mentioned  as  the  first  foreign 
ruler  over  Babylon  after  the  Chalda^an  dynasty 
was  overthrown.  The  actual  state  of  affairs 
compelled  the  author  to  represent  that  at  that 
time  Media  stOl  held  the  same  rank  as  Persia,  at 
least  formally  and  ofiicially,  and  at  first  ever 
gave  a  dynasty  and  name  to  the  whole  empire  ; 
and  this  was  done  with  sufficient  clearness  by 
the  mention  of  the  Medes  before  the  Persians  in 
this  verse.  * 

Verses  29  and  30.  Tlie  mnseqvertces.  Then 
commanded  Belshazzar,  and  they  clothed 
Daniel;  rather,  "and  caused  Daniel  to  be 
clothed."  The  literal  rendering  is,  "  Then  said 
Belshazzar,  and  they  clothed,"  etc.  ;  a  similar 
construction  as  in  chap.  ii.  49;  iv.  17,  25.  In 
the  Heb  llli^sb^]  (fut.  "with  "cav  convers. — cf. 
Neh.  xUi.  9 ;  2  Chron.  xxiv.  8 ;  Jon.  ii.  11), 
rather  than  =ni;'^2b~T  would  have  corresponded 
to  =l-3bn"l.  The  enrobing  is  therefore  to  be  re- 
garded as  immediately  succeeding  the  command, 
and  Hiivemick's  opinion,  that  "the  sudden 
death  of  the  king  prevented  the  execution  of 
his  design,"  is  evidently  wide  of  the  narrator's 
meaning  The  opinion  that  the  prophet  was  in- 
vested with  the  royal  insignia  of  the  purple  and 
the  necklace  on  the  same  evening,  involves  no 
questionable  feature,  which  could  lead  us  to  re- 
fer the  execution  of  the  king's  command  to  the 
following  day  (Dereser).  or  even  to  regard  L~j 
whole  incident  .as  improbable  (Hitzig,  etc. ) ;  but 
rather,  the  immedinte  bestowal  of  the  promised 
marks  of  favor  and  honor  harmonizes  fully  with 
the  oriental  despotic  methods  of  admini-stering 
government  and  justice,  which  under  different 
circumstances  observed  the  most  rapid  modes 
of  executing  punishment  (see  chap.  iii.  0,  20  et 
seq. ).  The  "  public  announcement"  of  the  pro- 
motion which  had  taken  place  (the  verb  '13  = 
Sanscrit  kriis,  Ktmi-rciv,  signifies  to  proclaim 
piiblidy.  as  was  shown  on  chap.  iii.  4),  in  the 
same  night  and  in  every  street  by  means  of 
heralds,  is  however  an  unjustified  demand  which 
the  closing  words  of  v.  29  by  no  means  involve. 
The  solemnity  in  question  may  have  been  con- 
fined to  the  range  of  the  royal  pa'.ace,  and  even 

♦  ["In  the  namins  of  the  Median  before  the  Per-sian  then 
lies  a  notable  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  this  narrative; 
for  the  hegemony  of  the  Medes  was  of  a  very  short  duration, 
ai:d  after  its  overthrow  by  the  Persians  the  form  of  expre* 
.sion  used  is  always  '  Perfiian>s  aitd  iifclen.'  as  is  found  in  tb» 
book  of  Esther."' — A'cif.l 


CHAP.  V.  1-30. 


13? 


to  the  banquet  hall  (which,  acoordiDg  to  v.  1. 
must  be  regarded  as  an  extended  building,  and 
as  filled  with  an  extraordinary  multitude). — 
Concerning  the  probable  motive  (namely,  be- 
cause his  God  and  Lord  was  thus  honored)  \ 
which  induced  Daniel,  despite  his  former  refusal, 
to  accept  the  expressions  of  the  royal  favor,  see 
on  V.  17.  In  connection  with  this,  the  assump- 
tion is  still  admissilile,  that  any  protest  which 
the  prophet  may  have  offered,  remained  without 
effect,  in  view  of  the  stormj'  haste  of  the  king  in 
his  alarm,  and  was  lost  an::d  the  acclamations 
and  the  nois.v  conversation  of  the  excited  throng. 
Of.  Jerome  :  "  Accepit  aut.em  (Daniel)  iiisigne  re- 
gium,  torguem  et  purpuram,  lit  Darim,  qui  erat 
suceessnrun  in  regnum,  fleret  notior  et  per  noti- 
tiam  hiinoratior.  Nee  niirum,  si  Baltasar, 
audiens  tristia,  solverit  prwmium,  quod  jtoUicitiis 
est.  Aut  enim  longo  post  tempore  credidit  Ven- 
tura, quce  dixerat,  aut  dum  Dei  Proplietnm 
Imiwrat,  sperat  se  veniam  co/iseeuturum." — Verse 
SO.  In  that  night  was  Belshazzar,  the  king 
of  the  Chaldaeans,  slain — evidently  through  a 
conspiracy  of  a  number  of  his  magnates,  which 
may  have  existed  previously,  but  svhich  did  not 
attempt  the  execution  of  its  design,  untU  the 
interpretation  of  the  mysterious  writing  by 
Daniel  gave  the  conspirators  courage.  Only 
this  opinion  seems  to  be  justified  by  the  lan- 
guage of  this  passage  and  by  the  context,*  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  more  general  view,  by 
which  the  king  was  slain  at  the  hands  of  the 
victorious  Medo-Persians,  who  are  supposed  to 
have  taken  the  city  on  that  night,  and  by  which 
Belshazzar  is  in  consequence  identified  with 
Nabonidus,  the  last  Chald;ean  king — ah  of  which 
ie  based  on  a  combination  of  Isa.  xvi.  ;  xxi.  5  ; 
Jer.  li.  39;  and  of  Xenophon,  Cyrifp.  vii.  5,  15 
et  seq.;  Herodotus,  I.  190,  etc.,  with  this  nar- 
rative. The  latter  view  has  recently  been  de- 
fended, especially  by  Hengsteuberg  (p.  325  et 
seq.),  Keil  (Einl.,  p.  417),  Havernick,  etc.,  and 
also  by  nearly  all  the  rationalistic  expositors  and 
critics  (also  by  Stiihelin,  Sinl.  ins  A.  ?'.,  p.  350 
et  seq. ),  and  is  certainlv  supported  by  the  open- 
ing verse  of  chap.  vL ,  m  case  it  be  immediately 
connected  with  the  one  before  us,  as  is  done  by 
the  writers  named.  It  is  however  more  than 
questionable  whether  this  arrangement  corre- 
sponds to  the  conception  and  design  of  the 
author;  for  (1)  the  words,  "And  Darius  the 
Median  took  the  kingdom,"  together  with  the 
subjoined  reference  to  his  age,  "  being  about 
threescore  and  two  years  old,"  seems  intended 
to  introduce  the  narrative  concerning  Darius  and 
his  relations  to  the  Babylonian  dynasty,  much 
rather  than  to  close  that  relating  to  Belshazzar. 
(2)  Berosus  and  Abydenus  relate  nothing  of  a 
taki:«g  of  Babylon  while  a  luxurious  banquet, 
held  by  the  last  Chaldaean  king  and  his  mag- 
nates, was  in  progress,  as  the  tradition  of  Xeno- 
phoL  and  Herodotus  asserts  (cf.  Introd.  §  8, 
note  3,  and  especially  the  extracts  from  Kranich- 
feld  on  this  question  there  adduced).  (3)  Bero- 
Bus,  in  Josephus,  Ant.  x.  11,  1,  does  not,  indeed, 
Btato  that  Nabonidus,  the  last  Babylonian  king. 


*[The  requirements  of  the  lungiiage  are  obviously  met 
quite  as  well  by  the  presumption  that  the  king  fell  that 
Bame  night  together  with  his  emjiire,  and  s(»  the  author  c.an- 
?idly  admits  a  little  further  ou.  although  himself  liriveu  to 
•.lother  -lew  by  tils  preconceived  theory  of  the  identity  of 
Belliaa££iir  with  £viI-merodach,l 


became  the  victim  of  a  conspiracy,  but  he  does 
ascribe  that  fate  to  Evil-merodach,  the  immediata 
successor  of  his  father  Xebuchaduezzar  (cf.  vs. 
11,  13,  18,  22).  The  conspiracy  in  the  case  of 
the  latter  was  headed  by  Xeriglissar,  the  brother- 
in-law  of  the  king,  and  removed  the  latter  under 
circumstances  entirely  similar  to  those  under 
which  Belshazzar  is  said  by  our  passage  to  hare 
been  slain,  by  murderers  whose  names  are  not 
given.  The  identity  of  the  latter  with  Evil- 
merodach  thtis  becomes  highly  probable  (cf. 
Introd.  1.  c).  (4)  Finally,  the  prophecy  of  the 
mysterious  writing  in  v.  25,  which  transfers  the 
Chaldaean  empire  to  the  hands  of  the  Medes  and 
Persians,  does  not  oppose,  but  it  rather  furors, 
the  mode  of  division  we  advocate,  on  which  an 
entirely  new  section  begins  with  chap.  vi.  1.  For 
precisely  as  in  chap.  ii.  38,  39,  Nebuchadnezzar, 
the  head  of  gold,  appears  flr.st  as  an  individual, 
and  then  as  identified  with  his  dynasty  and  aa 
the  representative  of  the  Babylonian  world-king- 
dom, so  Belshazzar  appears  first  under  the  con- 
ception of  a  single  person  —  in  the  words, 
"numbered,  numbered,  weighed" — but  after- 
ward as  identified  with  his  kingdom,  in  th" 
closing  prediction  expressed  by  0~S  or  VP^.B 
The  interval  of  perhaps  22-2-1  years  which  thns 
falls  between  his  own  destruction  and  that  of 
his  kingdom,  will,  in  view  of  the  recognized  per- 
spective character  of  all  nrophecy,  appear  no 
more  questionable  than  the  stiU  greater  number 
of  years  which,  according  to  that  earlier  predic- 
tion, were  to  elapse  betsveen  the  death  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  the  ruin  of  his  dynasty. 
Similar  groupings  of  immediate  with  more  dis- 
tant events  are  frequent  in  the  O.-T.  prophecies ; 
a  particularly  noteworthy  and  instructive  instance 
of  which  fact  may  be  found  in  the  remarkable 
prophecy  to  the  wife  of  Jeroboam  by  Ahijah  of 
Shiloh  in  1  Kings  xiv. ,  that  comprehends  three 
distinct  events,  between  which  extended  inter- 
vals intervene  :  (1 )  The  death  of  the  sick  prince, 
Abijah"(vs.  12,  13)  ;  (2)  the  overthrow  of  Jero- 
boam's dynasty,  more  than  28  years  later  (vs. 
10,  14  ;  cf.  1  kings  xv.  29  et  seq.) ;  (3)  the  ruin 
of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  which  did  not  transpire 
until  two  centuries  afterward  (v.  1 5  et  seq. ;  cf . 
2  Kings  xvii. ).  The  fundamental  law  of  all 
Messianic  typology,  by  which  later  events  are 
grouped  organically  with  earlier  ones,  and  by 
which  one  and  the  same  guilty  act  conditions  a 
succession  of  Divine  judgments  in  the  course  of 
developments,  underlies  this  collocation  in  the 
perspective  vision  of  a  single  prophecy.  "  The 
cause  of  the  sad  end  of  the  kingdom  of  the  ten 
tribes  existed  already  in  the  beginning  made  and 
cultivated  by  Jeroboam,  two  and  a  half  centuries 
before  ;  the  fate  that  extinguishes  the  house 
of  Jeroboam  is  at  bottom  the  same  which  de- 
stroys the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes.  Jero- 
boam's sin  destroys  his  dynasty  and  his  king- 
dom ;  for  this  reason  the  destruction  of  both  is 
comprehended  in  the  same  prophecy,  and  not 
merely  because  the  destruction  of  the  dynasty 
coincides  with  that  of  the  kingdom"  (Kianich- 
feld  ;  cf.  also  Biihr,  on  1  Kings  chap,  xiv  p.  148 


*  (The  weakness  of  these  arguments  is  obvious,  and  in- 
deed seems  to  have  been  apparent  to  the  writer  hiiiiHeif.  TiM 
eoUatA.'ral  considerations  which  he  adduces  i-elow  are  tor 
vague  to  support  a  tlieory  so  plainly  at  vuriance  with  tlu 
tenor  of  the  text  and  its  comii*ctiuDa.] 


i:ii 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


of  vol.  7  of  ibe  Bibelicerk).  Substantially  the 
same  principles  apply  to  the  predictions  of  evil 
lenounoed  by  our  prophet  against  Nebuchad- 
lezzar  and  his  kingdom,  and  against  Belshazzar 
md  his  kingdom.  The  connection  of  widely 
.eparate  everts  which  they  embody,  is  natural 
md  orgauically  necessary ;  and  therefore  the  re- 
erence  to  tin>  events  of  fulfilment,  although 
i  eparate  in  point  of  time,  upon  which  we  insist, 
Lnvolves  no  arbitrary  features. — The  assertion 
of  Keil  (Eiid.  1.  c. )  that  if  the  two  events  were 
cot  coincident,  the  author  would  have  been  re- 
quired to  -state,  in  chap.  vi.  1,  how  the  second 
fact  in  the  fulfilment  stands  related  to  the  first, 
or,  in  other  words,  "when  and  how  the  tr.ins- 
mission  of  the  kingdom  to  the  Medes  and  Per- 
sians came  to  pass,"  is  entirely  uncalled  for,  and 
is  opposed  by  the  analogy  of  Ahijah's  oracle, 
whose  final  and  complete  realization  by  the 
overthrow  of  Israel,  is  likewise  not  exj)r(:ssly 
noticed ;  and  in  addition  the  inere  mention  of 
the  taking  of  Babylon  by  Darius  is  a  sufficient 
indication  of  the  anti-typical  relation  of  that 
event  to  chap.  v.  25-38.  The  annexed  reference 
to  the  age  of  Darius  seems  rather  to  indicate  a 
reference  to  a  period  considerably  later,  than  a 
design  to  designate  the  particular  night  in  which 
Belshazzar  was  slain  as  falling  in  the  sixty- 
second  year  of  Darius.  There  was  certainly  no 
apparent  motive  for  the  .author  to  make  a  chron- 
ological statement  of  this  sort. — In  relation  to 
the  peculiar  opinion  of  Ebrard  (Die  Offenhdrung 
Johitnnii  ei-kUirt,  p.  53  et  seq. ),  that  chap.  v.  80 
together  with  chap.  vi.  1,  refers  to  the  overthrow 
of  Laborasoarchad,  the  grandson  and  third  suc- 
ce.ssor  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  by  Nabonidus  (= 
Darius  the  Jlede),  see  on  chap.  vi.  1  et  seq.  (cf. 
supra  Introd.  §  8,  notes  3  and  4). 


Ethico-fundamental  principles  related 
to  the  history  of  salvation,  apolo- 

GETICAL  remarks,  and  HOMILETICAL  SUG- 
GESTIONS. 

} .  The  principal  object  in  an  apologetic  point 
of  view  wQl  have  been  realized  in  this  section, 
whenever  the  identity  of  Belshazzar  with  Evil- 
merodach  is  established,  and  when,  in  conse- 
quence, the  repeated  designation  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar as  his  father  (vs.  11,  13,  18,  23),  the  cor- 
respondence of  the  mode  of  his  sudden  and  vio- 
lent death  (v.  30)  with  that  attested  by  Berosus 
with  regard  to  Evil-merodach,  and  the  accession 
of  Darius  the  Mede  to  the  throne  of  Babylon  at 
a  period  considerably  later,  shall  have  been 
properly  substantiated.  After  what  has  been 
observed  upon  this  question  on  v.  30,  and  also 
in  the  Introd.  (§  8,  note  3),  it  only  remains  to 
examine  the  question,  "  In  how  far  does  the 
naiTative  yield  to  the  tendency-critical  attempts 
to  represent  it  as  a  romantic  fiction  of  the  Mac- 
cabiean  age  ?  "—According  to  Bleek  (Einl.  § 
2')(i),  V.  Lengerke  (Dnnid,  p.  241  et  seq.,  p. 
250)  and  others,  the  story  was  inspired  by  the 
plundering  of  the  temple  .at  Jerusalem  by  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes  in  the  year  B.  C.  ll>8,  and 
above  a  year  before  the  MaccabaJan  revolt.  The 
Virutal  manner  in  which  the  Syrian  king  at  that 
<ime  penetrated  into  the  temple  of  Jehovah, 
»nd  seized,   with  polluted   hands,   the  golden 


lavers  and  other  sacred  vessels  (1  Mace.  i.  21  el 
seq.;  2  Maco.  v.  15  et  seq.).  is  said  to  have  led 
the  pseudo-Daniel  to  compose  this  history,  and 
"  by  the  fate  of  Belshazzar  to  warn  the  Syrian 
monarch,  that  a  similar  Divine  judgment  would 
be  visited  on  him,  because  of  his  sacrilege." 
But  the  narrative  concerning  the  Seleucidse  and 
the  Maccabees  makes  no  mention  of  a  luxurious 
banquet,  such  as  a  sacrificial  feast,  at  which 
anything  transpired  that  would  at  all  compare 
with  the  profanation  of  the  sacred  vessels,  as 
described  in  this  chapter ;  and  the  only  remain- 
ing parallel  between  the  passages  cited  from  1st 
and  2d  Maccabees,  and  Dan.  i.  2  (cf.  v.  2),  is 
surely  insufficient  to  justify  the  adoption  of  the 
charge  that  the  history  was  invented  to  further 
a  tendency  !  Any  other  embellishment  of  the 
sacrilege  that  took  place  at  that  time  would 
certainly  have  been  more  appropriate  than  the 
one  here  offered,  which  does  not  charge  the  in- 
solent spoiler  of  the  temple  with  venting  his 
frivolous  pride  on  the  stolen  relics,  but  reserves 
this  for  his  son  aiid  successor!  The  tendency- 
narrator  might  well  be  charged  with  clumsiness, 
if  he  had  represented  his  Epiphanes-Belshazzar 
as  not  merely  easy  to  be  excited  and  capable 
of  contrition  and  repentance  while  influenced 
by  terror,  but  also  as  promising  and  conferring 
the  highest  dignities  and  honors  of  his  kingdom 
upon  a  zealous  theocrat  and  prophet  of  Jehovah. 
The  circumstance  that  such  a  theocrat  is  per- 
mitted to  accept  such  honors  and  rewards  (v. 
29)  nnthout  further  question,  is  likewise  in 
strange  contrast  with  the  rigid  monotheism  and 
anti- Hellenistic  fanaticism  of  the  Judaism  of 
Maccaba;an  times,  as  whose  representative  the 
author  is  said  to  have  written,  and  for  which 
his  work  is  alleged  to  have  been  designed  (cf. 
1  Mace.  i.  24 ;  Dan.  xi.  28). — In  no  wise  superior 
to  this  theory  of  the  date  of  the  history,  as  ad- 
vocated by  Bleek  and  v.  Lengerke,  is  the  asser- 
tion of  Hitzig,  that  although  this  section  was 
not  composed  before  the  revolt  of  the  Asmo- 
najans,  it  yet  originated  in  the  first  year  aftcj 
that  rising  took  place,  immediately  after  and  in 
consequence  of  the  magnificent  feasts  which 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  held  in  B.  C.  166  near 
Daphne,  when,  besides  splendid  games  and  lux- 
urious banquets,  there  was  a  solemn  procession 
in  the  presence  of  many  ladies  of  the  highest, 
as  well  as  of  lower  rank,  in  which  "  the  images 
of  all  conceivable  gods  were  carried,  together 
with  an  incredible  number  of  golden  and  silver 
vessels."  If  the  report  by  Polybius  (1.  31,  cp, 
3,  4)  respecting  those  festivities  be  carefully  ex- 
amined, it  will  reveal  a  most  marked  discrepancy 
between  the  historical  original  and  the  supposed 
copy,  which  was  framed  after  it  \>y  the  alleged 
pseudo-Daniel.  Polybius  does  not  mention  the 
sacrilegious  use  during  those  feasts  of  sacred 
vessels  belonging  to  the  temple  with  a  single 
syllable.  He  states  indeed  that  the  expense 
connected  with  those  festivities  was  chiefly  met 
out  of  the  treasures  stolen  from  various  temples 
— but  from  Kijyptian  temples,  which  the  pseudo- 
Daniel  would  assuredly  have  placed  in  the  cate- 
gory of  the  vain  "gods  of  gold,  silver,  brass, 
iron,  wood,  and  stone"  (vs.  4,  23),  and  whose 
desecration  he  would  have  been  more  ready  to 
applaud  than  to  censure.  But  beyond  all  this, 
Polybius  reveals  no  trace  of  a  knowledge  that 
the  wild  festivities  were  interrupted  by  a  terrify 


CHAP.  V.  1-30. 


135 


ing  incident,  which  compelled  the  proud  Syrian 
king  to  recognize  the  judicial  interference  of 
Buperior  Divine  power  ;  nor  of  any  inclination 
on  the  part  of  that  prince  to  honor  and  promote 
the  prophet  who  opposed  him  with  earnest  cen- 
sure, despite  his  boldness ;  nor  yet  of  a  course 
on  the  part  of  the  heroic  Jewish  defender  of  his 
faith  towards  the  heathen  ruler,  which,  al- 
though not  slavishly  subservient,  was  yet  cour- 
teous, and  mindful  of  the  obedience  due  from  a 
subject  to  his  superior.  But  if  such  a  meeting 
between  a  Je^vish  zealot  and  the  proud  Anti- 
ochus,  who  was  fanatically  devoted  to  his  Hel- 
lenistic faith  in  the  gods,  had  transpired  during 
a  public  feast  in  the  Maccabfean  age,  a  materi- 
ally different  kind  of  incidents  might  have  been 
looked  for,  from  that  described  in  this  chapter. 
Both  the  i'-cpji(favia  and  (ppovoKTovta  of  the  blood- 
thirsty tyrant,  and  the  defiance  inspired  by 
faith,  prepared  for  conflict,  and  careless  of 
death,  which  was  characteristic  of  the  martyr  of 
the  theocracy  who  was  engaged  in  an  open  re- 
volt against  the  despot,  would  have  been  brought 
into  collision  in  a  manner  entirely  different  from 
anything  found  in  the  report  of  Polybius — 
which  contains  no  mention  whatever  of  such  an 
.nterruption  during  the  feasts  of  Daphne — and 
also  from  the  description  found  in  our  alleged 
tendency-forgerj'.  The  latter,  if  it  were  really 
the  work  of  a  pseudological  apocalyptist  of  the 
Alaccabsan  times,  would,  without  any  doubt 
ivhatever,  have  presented  to  our  notice  persons 
of  the  stamp  of  Matthias  (1  Mace.  ii.  2,  18  et 
seq. ),  Judas  and  Simon  Maccabeus  (ibid,  chap, 
iii.  1  et  seq. ),  and  Eleazar  |2  Mace,  vi.)  as  op- 
ponents of  the  raging  heathen,  instead  of  a  man 
like  Daniel.  A  narrative  of  the  kind  before  us, 
as  respects  its  contents  and  progress,  would  be 
wholly  inconceivable  as  a  product  of  the  ortho- 
dox Palestinian  Judaism  of  the  year  B.  C.  ICG, 
and  would  rank  as  an  unequalled  historical 
monstrosity. 

2.  Accordingly,  if  confidence  may  be  placed 
in  the  pre-Maccabajan,  and,  what  amounts  to 
the  same  thing,  in  the  Babylonian  origin  of  the 
history  during  the  captivity,  it  will  be  possible 
for  that  very  reason  to  examine  the  miracle  of 
the  mysteriously  introduced  hand  which  traced 
the  writing,  as  here  recoi:ied,  without  being  re- 
strained by  sceptical  considerations.  It  will  not 
be  necessary  to  inquire  in  this  connection,  hoio 
such  a  thing  could  take  place,  but  merely, 
w/iet/ter  and  why  ^uch  an  event  was  itecensai'y. — 
The  necessity  for  a  miraculous  announcement 
to  Belshazzar  of  the  impending  judgment  was 
co:  ^tioned  by  the  fact  that  hLs  impious  conduct 
had  reached  an  intolerable  height  when  he  de- 
secrated the  sacred  vessels  of  Jehovah's  temple 
to  a  common  use,  and  exposed  them  to  the 
ridicule  of  a  besotted  heathen  mob,  and  also 
that  it  threatened  danger  to  the  faith  in  Jeho- 
vah of  the  community  of  exiles.  If  such  an 
act  of  presumption  was  permitted  to  pass  with- 
out being  Divinely  censured  and  punished,  it 
might  certainly  be  expected  that  not  only  the 
last  spark  of  reverence  for  the  mighty  God  of 
the  Jews  would  fade  from  the  consciousness  of 
the  royal  officials  and  the  Babylonian  population, 
but  that  the  faithful  adherence  of  the  Jewish 
captives  to  their  confession  would  gradually 
lose  its  firmness,  and  give  way  to  a  tendency  to 
favor  the  idolatrous  worship  of  the  Babylonians, 


and  to  adopt  their  luxurious,  dissipated,  and 
immoral  mode  of  life.  Dangers  such  as  these 
are  described,  in  a  realizing  manner,  in  the 
second  part  of  Isaiah  (see  xlvi.  0  et  seq.;  Ivii.  5 
et  seq.;  Ixv.  3  et  seq.;  Iviii.  2  et  seq.;  lix.  3 
et  seq.  Cf.  supra,  Introd.  g  1,  note  1);  and 
it  appears  from  the  penitential  prayer  of 
our  prophet  in  chap.  ix. ,  that  they  existed 
for  his  people,  and  threatened  the  continu- 
ance of  the  theocracy  and  its  Messianic  faith, 
while  in  the  land  of  exile.  With  regard  to  them 
it  became  imperatively  necessary  that  a  stem 
example  should  be  made  of  the  presumptuous 
king,  while  giving  utterance  to  his  witticisms 
and  blasphemies,  and  while  surrounded  by  the 
sycophants  of  his  court  and  the  women  of  his 
harem,  that  thus  the  name  of  the  only  true  God 
might  be  brought  powerfully  to  the  recollection 
of  all,  and  that  an  emphatic  testimc«i3',  coupled 
with  an  immediate  execution  of  the  threat, 
might  be  borne  against  the  impious  conduct  ot 
the  idolaters.  Such  a  testimony,  however, 
could  only  possess  sufficient  weight  if  it  were 
demonstrated  to  be  absolutely  miraculous,  ad- 
mitting of  no  natural  explanation  {i.e.,  for  the 
purpose  of  destroying  its  supernatural  force), 
and  transpiring  under  the  observation  of  all  who 
were  present.  For  this  reason  all  the  various 
attempts  to  limit  the  incomprehensible  character 
of  the  incident,  that  have  been  made  by  modem 
expositors  since  M.  Geier,  are  to  be  rejected, 
without  exception;  e.g.,  the  assumption  of 
Geier,  which  decidedly  conflicts  with  v.  8,  that 
the  writing  was  visible  to  the  king  .and  Daniel, 
but  to  no  others  (similarly  Calvin  remarks  that 
the  Chaldteans  were  all  smitten  with  blindness— 
"  itd  acteaitos  fuiixe,  nt  tidendo  non  HdcviiU") , 
the  coarsely  naturalistic  attempt  at  explanation 
made  by  Bertholdt,  that  the  hostile  party  of  the 
king's  courtiers,  who  were  in  league  with  the 
Medo-Persian  besiegers  of  the  city,  produced 
the  writing  in  a  purely  natural  manner,  but  gave 
a  mysterious  appearance  to  the  transaction,  in 
order  "to  gratify  their  malice  and  over-confi- 
dence, by  announcing  his  last  hour  to  the  victim 
of  their  treason  ;  "  and  finally,  the  psychological- 
visionary  mode  of  interpretation,  advocated  in 
the  last  century  by  Liiderwald,  and  more  re- 
cently by  Kranichfeld — the  latter  by  means  of 
an  attempt  to  transfer  the  miraculous  feature  to 
the  imagination  of  the  king  (cf.  his  observation 
on  V.  8,  p.  221  :  "How  and  when  during  the 
hilarious  banquet  the  writing  itself  was  traced 
on  the  wall,  was  of  no  importance  to  the  author, 
as  the  wonderful  feature  was  alone  significant 
for  his  purpose,  that  the  king  should  obseiye,  at 
the  moment  of  the  blasphemous  act  by  which  he 
ridiculed  the  God  of  Israel,  the  hand  which 
wrote  the  sentence  that  changed  the  confident 
humor  of  the  idolater  into  anxious  fear  ").  In 
opposition  to  these  naturalizing  interpretations, 
and  especially  to  the  one  last  mentioned,  see  the 
remarks  on  v.  5,  and  compare  Buddeus,  Iluit. 
ecci.  V.  Tent.,  II  p.  508:  "  Verum  qnis  non  videt, 
hec  omnia  ad  mernit  conjecturn^  redire,  qticB 
eadem  rejiciunUir  fiiHlitate.  qvti  afferuntur.  Sa- 
tiim  itoqiiefiierit,  in  ii.t  my/iiii'.icd'e.  g>i(e  Daniel 
ipse  de  haa  re  tnididtrit,  scripturam  srii.  ita  com- 
parntam fuisse,  ut  sapientes  et  magi,  etn  earn  vide- 
rent  (v.  8),  non  tnmen  legere,  midto  minus  inter- 
pretari  putverint ;  Danielem  autem  earn  ita  a 
legere  et  interpretari  potuiase,  ut  rex  ipse  itatin 


lae 


THE  i-ROPHET  DANIEL. 


contitceretur,  leclumem  iettim  atque  interpreta- 
tioneirt  Tcram  esse."  Also  cf.  Pfeiffer,  Dubia  rel- 
ate, p.  503  SB.,  and  Starke,  Synops.  on  the  pass- 
age. 

3.  In  accordance  with  this,  the  homiletical 
treatment  of  the  section  is  chiefly  concerned 
with  the  miracle  of  the  writing  and  its  mys- 
terious origin  and  contents,  as  the  central  point 
of  the  narrative,  and  also  of  its  theological  and 
ethical  importance.  As  in  the  preceding  chap- 
ter the  object  of  the  narrative  was  to  show  tliat 
"  pride  goeth  before  destruction,"  so  the  aim 
here  is  to  illustrate  the  ' '  judgments  that  are 
prepared  for  scorners "  (Prov.  xix.  29),  the 
"snare"  into  which  "they  bring  the  whole 
city"  (Prov.  xxix.  8),  the  " non-iinmunity  from 
punishment  of  the  blasphemers  of  the  Divine 
Wisdom  "  (Wisd.  i.  6).  Cf.  Psa.  i.  I ;  Jer.  xv. 
1 7  ;  Prov.  xiii.  1 ;  xiv.  6 ;  xxiv.  9 ;  also  Ec- 
^us.  xxvii.  28  :  "  Mockery  and  reproach  are 
■  I'rom  the  proud  ;  but  vengeance  as  a  lion  shall 
lie  in  wait  for  them  ;  "  Psa.  Ixxil  4  :  "  He  shall 
break  in  pieces  the  oppressor  "  (or  blasphemer) ; 
1  Cor.  V.  10  .  "Nor  revUers  .  .  .  shall  inherit 
the  kingdom  of  God,"— and  other  oracles  di- 
rected against  the  re%-iling  and  blasjftieming  of 
the  Holy  One,  which  may  afford  a  theme  for  a 
homiletical  treatment  of  the  section  as  a  whole. 
Starke  is  therefore  correct  in  designating  as  the 
leading  features  of  the  narrative  "  Belshazzar's 
transgression  and  his  puEishment."  Cf.  Geior's 
arrangement  of  subjects  in  this  chapter  :  "  (1) 
Regiuia  flayilium  (v.  1-4) ;  (2)  subseqxiens  por- 
tentiim  (v.  5,  6);  (i)  porientiinterpretamentnm, 
partim  vt  pi-ofariis  impossibile  (v.  7-6),  partim 
ut  Dnnieli  expeditum  ac  facile  (v.  10-28) ;  (4) 
inteipretamenti  complementum  (v.  29,  30)."  — 
With  reference  to  the  relation  of  the  fundamen- 
tal idea  in  this  narrative  to  that  of  the  preced- 
ing section,  cf.  Melaucthon  :  "  Supra  pruposuit 
legem  ngentempixnitentiam  et propaganteni  veros 
euitus,  quern  Deus  etiam  ornavit  prcemiis.     Nunc 


addit  contrarium  exemphim  regis  impii,  reMitu- 
entis  idolatriam.,  non  agcntis  panitetUiam.  quern 
I)eus  pnnit  et  regno  exuit  .  .  .  Ha*  hhisphemi<i» 
enim  dto  seg^iuntur  parice,  juxta  secundum  prce- 
ceplum:  ^Non  habebit  Deus  insontem,'  etc.  (Ex. 
XX.  7)." 

Upon  separate  points  the  following  passages 
may  be  used,  as  furnishing  suitable  matter  for 
homiletical  discussion  . 

Verses  2-4.  Luxurious  banquets  and  carousals 
are  dangerous  precipices,  even  for  the  pious  and 
unsuspecting  (cf.  Jude  v.  12);  at  them  Satan 
himself  is  the  host  and  master  (Cramer,  in 
Starke,  under  reference  to  1  Cor.  x.  20),  and 
there  religion,  the  fear  of  God,  brotherly  love, 
uprightness,  morality — and,  in  short,  everything 
is  forgotten  (Starke). 

Verse  17.  Daniel's  disinterestedness  and  mod- 
esty. On  these  Jerome  observes  :  •^^mulemm 
Danielem,  regis  dignitatem  et  mvnera  contem- 
nentem,   qui  absque  pretio  proferens  veritatem 

\  jam  iUo  tempore  praceptum  evaxgdicum  sequubi 
tur :  'Gratis  accepistis.  gratis  date'   (Matt.   i. 

I  8).     Alioquin  et  tristia  nuntiantem  itidecens  erat 

!  Ubenter  dona  accipere." 

I  Verses  2.5-28.  The  oracle  against  Belshazzar, 
whose  spirit  is  :  "If  thou  wUt  neglect  to  num- 
ber thy  days,  to  ii>eig/i  thyself  in  the  balance  of 

I  divine  righteousness  (Job  xxxi.  (>),  and  to  meas- 
ure thyself  by  the  rule  of  the  Divine  law,  thou 
shalt  be  weighed  by  God  in  the  scale  of  Hia 
judgment,  and — be  found  wanting."  Cf.  the  fig- 
ure of  farming  grain.  Am.  ix.  9;  Isa.  xxx.  24; 
Jer.  XV.  7;  Matt.  iii.  12;  Luke  xxii.  31,  etc. ; 
and  also  Joachim  Lange  :  ' '  Outside  of  Christ 
we  are  always  wanting  in  the  scales  of  God,  and 
are  lighter  than  nothing,"  Psa  Ixii.  10,  and 
Starke:  "The  duration  of  everj'  kingdom  ia 
pre-determined  by  God  ;  without  the  permission 
of  God,  no  monarch  is  able  to  extend  or  limit 
it,"  etc. 


6.   The  deliverance  of  Daniel  from  the  lion's  den. 

Chap.  VL  1-29."      [English  Bible,  v.  31-vi  28.] 

SI       Darius  the  Median  took  [received]  the  kingdom,  being  about  three  score  and 
two  years  old  [as  a  son  of  si.xty  and  two  yearsj. 

1  It  pleased  [seemed  good  before]  Darius  to  set  over  the  kingdom  a  hundred 
and  twenty  princes  [satraps],  which  should  be  over  the  whole  [in  all  the]  king- 

2  d'om ;  and  over ''  these  [them],  three  presidents,  of  whom  Daniel  ivas  first 
[one]  ;  that  the  [these]  princes  might  give  accounts  [the  reason]  unto  them, 
and  the  king  should  have  no  damage  [not  be  damaged]. 

3  Then  this  Daniel  was  preferred^  [made  eminent]  above  the  presidents  and 
princes,  because  an  excellent  spirit  teas  in  him ;  and  the  king  thought   to  set 

4  him  over  the  whole  realm  [all  the  kingdom].     Then  the  presidents  and  princes 
sought  [were  seeking]  to  find  occasion  against  [cause  as  to]  Daniel  concerning 
[from  the  side  of]  the  kingdom ;  but  [and]  they  could  find  none  occasion  nor 
fault  [corrupt   thine/]  ;  ibrasmueh  as  he  was  faithful,  neither  was  there  any  erro 
[wrong]  or  fault  [corrupt  thii)ff'\  found  in  him. 

5  Then  said  these  men,  [That]  We  shall  not  find  any  occasion  against  [cause  at 
to]  this  Daniel,  except  we  find  it  against  him  concerning  [in]  the  law  of  his  God. 

6  Then  these  presidents   and   princes   assembled  [crowded]  together  to  [upon]  the 
1  king,  and  said  thus  unto  him,  King  Darius,  live  for  ever.     All  the  presidents  ot 


CHAP.  VI.  1-29.  1S7 


the  kincrdom,  the  governors,  and  the  princes,  the  counsellors,  and  the  captains 
[pashas],  have  consulted  together  to  establish  a  royal  [or,  for  the  king  to  establish 
a]  statute  [an  established  act  of  the  king],  and  to  make  a  firm  decree  [confirm  an  in- 
terdict], that  whosoever  [any  one  that]  shall  ask  a  petition  of  [an  asking  li'oni] 
any  god  or  man  for  [till]   thirty  days,  save  of  [except  from]  thee,  O  king,  he 

8  shall  be  east  into  the  den  of  [the]  lions.  Xow,  O  king,  [mayest  thou]  estab- 
lish the  decree  [interdict],  and  sign  the  writing,  that  it  be  not  changed  [change 
not],  acco)-ding  to   [like]  the  law  of  the  Medes  [Media]  and  Persians  [Persia], 

9  which  alteroth  not  [will  not  pass  away].  Wiierefore  [Therefore  the]  king 
Darius  signed  the  writing  and  the  decree  [^interdict]. 

10  Now  when  Daniel  [And  Daniel,  as  «oora  as  he]  knew  that  the  writing  wot 
signed,  he  went  into  his  house  ;  and,  his  [its]  windows  bein(/  [were]  open  in  his 
[its  upper]  chamber  toward  [in  front  of]  Jerusalem,  [and]  be  '  kneeled  upon  his 
knees  three  times  a  day  [in  the  day],  and  prayed  [was  praying],  and  gave 
thanks  [thanking]  before  his  God,  as  he  did  aforetime  [because  he  was   doing 

11  so  from  before  that  timej.  Then  these  men  assembled  [crowded  in],  and  found 
Daniel  praying  faskingj  and  making  supplication  before  his  God. 

12  Then  they  came  near,  and  spake  before  the  king  concerning  [upon]  the  king's 
decree  [interdict]  ;  Hast  thou  not  signed  a  decree  [an  interdict],  that  every 
[any]  man  that  shall  ask  a  petition-  of  [from]  any  god  or  man  within  [till]  thirty 
days,  save  of  [except  from]  thee,  O  king,  shall  be  cast  into  the  den  of  [the] 
lions  ?  The  king  answered  and  said.  The  thing  is  true  [word  is  firm]  accord- 
ing to  [like]  the  law  of  the  Medes  [Media]  and  Persians  [Persia],  which  altereth 

13  not  [will  not  pass  away].  Then  answered  they,  and  said  before  the  king. 
That '  Daniel,  which  is  of  [from]  the  captivity  of  the  children  of  Judah,  regard- 
eth  not  [has  not  put  attention  upon]  thee,  O  king,  nor  [and]  the  decree  [inter- 
dict] that  thou  hast  signed,  but  [and]  maketh  his  petition  [is  asking  his  asking] 

14  three  times  a  day  [in  the  day].  Then  the  king,  when  he  heard  these  worrls 
[this  word  (thing)],  loas  sore  displeased  with  [it  greatly  offended  upon]  him- 
self,  and  [he]  set  his  heart  on  Daniel  to  deliver  him  ;  and  he  laboured  [was 
exerting  himself]  till  the  going  down  of  the  sun  to  deliver  [rescue]  him. 

■"5  Then  these  men  assembled  [crowded]  unto  [upon]  the  king,  and  said  unto  the 
king,  Know,  O  kintr,  that  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians  is  [it  is  a  law  to 
Media  and  Persia],  that  no  decree  nor  statute  [interdict  and  established  act] 

16  which  the  king  cstablisheth  [shall  establish]  may  be  changed  [change].  Then 
the  king  commanded  [said],  and  they  brought  Daniel,  and  cASt  him  into  the  den 
of  [the]  lions.  ^Vow  the  king  spake  and  said  unto  Daniel,  Thy  God,  whom 
thou'  servest  continually  [art  serving  in  continuity],  he'  will  [may  he]  deliver 

17  thee.  And  a  stone  was  brought,  and  laid  upon  the  mouth  a'  the  den;  and  the 
king  sealed  it  udth  his  oicn  signet,  and  with  the  signet  oi  his  lords,  that  the 
purpose  [(will)  matter]  might  not  be  changed  [change]  conct  ning  [in  respect  to] 
Daniel. 

15  Then  the  king  went  to  his  palace,  and  passed  [lodged]  the  nitjht  fasting  : 
neither  were  instruments  of  music  brought  [and  concubines  le  did  not  bring] 

19  before  him,  and  his  sleep  went  from  [fled  upon]  him.  Then  tie  king  arose  very 
early  in  tiie  morning  [in  the  dawn  would  rise   in  the  earli/  light],  and  went  in 

20  haste  unto  the  den  of  [the]  lions.  And  when  he  came  [near]  to  the  den,  he 
cried  with  a  lamentable  [pained]  voice  unto  Daniel:  and  the  king  spake  and 
said  to  Daniel,  O  Daniel,  servant  of  the  living  God,  is  thy  God,  whom  thou' 
servest  continually  [«rt  serving  in  continuity],  able '  to   deliver  thee  from  the 

21  lions?     Then  said  [talked]  Daniel  unto  [with]  the  king,  O  king,  live  for  ever. 

22  Mj'  God  hath  sent  his  angel,  and  hath  shut  the  lions'  mouths,  that  [and]  they 
have  not  hurt  me  :  forasmuch  as  before  him  innocency  was  found  in  [to]  me; 
and  also  before  thee,  O  king,  have  I  done  no  hurt. 

23  Then  was  the  king  exceeding  glad  [it  gre.itly  rejoiced]  for  him  [upon  him- 
self],  and  commanded  [said]  that  they  should  take  Daniel  up  out  of  the  den. 
So  fAnd]  Daniel  was  taken  up  out  of  the  den,  and  no  manner  of  hart  was 
found  ui.on  [in]  him,  because  he  Ijelieved  in  his  God. 

14  And  the  king  commanded  [said],  and  they  brought  those  men  which  [who]  had 


1.3<? 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


accused  *  Daniel,  and  they  cast  them,  into  the  den  of  [the]  lions,  them,  their  chil 
dren,  and  their  wives  ;  and  the  lions  had  the  mastery  of"  them,  and  brake  all  then 
bones  in  jneces  or  ever  [ere]  they  came  at  the  bottom  of  the  den.' 

25  Then  [the]  king  Darius  wrote  unto  all  people,  nations,  and  languages, '  that 

26  dwell  in  all  tiie  earth  ;  Peace  be  multiplied  unto  you. "  1  make  '°  a  decree,  That 
in  every  dominion  of  my  kingdom  men  tremble  and  fear  ''  before  the  God  of 
Daniel ;  for  lie  is  the  living  God,  and  steadfast  for  ever,  and  his  kingdom  tluU 

27  which  shall  not  be  destroj'ed,  and  his  dominion  shall  be  even  unto  the  end.  Hi 
delivereth  [delivering]  and  rescueth  [rescuing],  and  he  worketh  [working]  signs 
and  wonders  in  heaven  [the  heavens]  and  in  [the]  earth,  who  hath  delivered 
Daniel  from  the  power  of  the  lions. 

28  So  [And]  this  Daniel  prospered  in  the  reign  of  Darius,  and  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus 
the  Persian. 

GRAMMATICAL   NOTES. 

{*  As  Chap,  vi.  in  the  original  begins  with  verse  31  of  the  A.  V.,  there  is  a  difference  of  one  in  numbering  the  verses 
of  this  section. — ^  The  form  fi^i)T»  followed  by  "^^   seems  like  a  nonn  in  the  emphatic  state,  and  may  not  inaptly  be 

rendered,  "(75  the  chief  above.'^ — ^  -jhe  pronoun,  being  expressed,  is  emphatic,—*  H  here  =  ort  expletive, — '  The  order 
of  words  is  emphatic :  Thy  God  .  .  ,  .  hat  He  been  able. — ^  Literally,  that  ate  his  pteceti  of,  i.  e.,  backbit,  as  in  ch.ip, 
iii.  8, — '  The  order  and  style  of  the  original  are  very  emphatic  :  aiid  they  did  not  reach  to  the  earth  of  the  den  till  thtit 
(before)  the  lions  railed  over  t/iem,  etc.. — "  The  terms  in  the  original  are  the  same  as  in  chap,  iii.  4.  the  nations,  the  peoples, 
and  the  tongues. — ^  Literally,  J/ai/ 2/o«r  peace  be  great, — ^'^  From  me  is  made. — "  They  sftall  be  trembling  and  fearing 
from.\ 


EXEGKTICAL   REMARKS. 

Verse  1  [v,  31].  Transitional  introductory  oh- 
sercation.s.  And  Darius  the  Median  took  the 
kingdom,  etc.  The  copula  before  -1"^1~  serves, 
indeed,  to  connect  the  present  section  closely 
with  the  preceding  one,  and  indicates  that  its 
sulDJect  is  more  intimately  related  to  the  fore- 
going, than  is  the  case  in  chapters  iii, ,  iv, ,  and 
V. ,  ivhich  begin  \vithout  any  copulative  particle 
whatever.  The  "1  however,  does  not  compel 
the  assumption  that  chapters  v.  and  vi.  were 
properly  a  unit  in  their  plan  and  the  time  of 
their  compo-sition  (Hitzig,  Kranichfeld;  ;  for  (1) 
chap,  ii,,  although  forming  a  decidedly  inde- 
pendent whole,  likewise  begins  with  the  copula, 
as  do  also  numerous  sections  in  the  historical 
and  prophetical  portions  of  the  Old  Testament, 
whose  subjects  are  independent  of  what  pre- 
cedes them,  (2)  Kranichfeld's  opinion  (p,  210) 
that  chap,  v.  ought  to  conclude  with  a  "theo- 
cratic panegyrical  closing  sentence  "  similar  to 
chap,  vi.  27,  28,  if  it  were  to  rank  as  an  inde- 
pendent and  complete  section  in  itself,  is  appa- 
rently confirmed,  indeed,  by  the  closing  verses 
of  chaps,  ii,,  iii.,  and  iv.,  but  is  decidedly  op- 
posed by  chap,  i, ,  which  has  no  such  doxology 
at  the  close,  (3;  Chapters  v,  and  vi.  are  dis- 
tinguished from  each  other  by  several  unmis- 
takable differences  in  the  mode  of  expression 
and  representation,  which  indicate  the  composi- 
tion of  these  sections  at  diflferent  times.  Notice 
especially  the  character  of  the  descriptions  in 
chap,  v,,  which  are  more  circumstantial  and 
full  of  repetitions  than  those  in  chap  vi,  (cf,  vs. 
2,  i.  4  with  V,  23  ;  v,  7  with  v,  12  ;  v.  12  with 
v.  10  ;  v,  l(i  with  vs,  7  and  29,  etc,),  (4)  The 
transactions  recorded  in  the  two  sections  are 
separated  by  an  interval  of  at  least  twenty-two 
years  icf,  supra,  on  bhap.  v,  30)  since  the 
events  of  chap,  v,  transpire!  under  the  fourth 
reign  before  the  close  of  the  Chaldasan  dynasty, 


while  chap.  vi.  falls  in  the  reign  of  Darius  the 
Mede, — which  covered  about  two  years  and  a 
half — and  probably  not  in  its  opening  period 
(see  vs.  15,  17)  ;  and  chap.  v.  creates  the  im- 
pression that  it  was  composed  immediately  after 
the  events  which  it  records  transpired,  and  that, 
like  all  the  narratives  in  the  historical  part  of 
the  book,  it  originated  while  they  were  still 
fresh  in  the  recollection  of  the  writer  (cf.  In- 
trod.,  §  4,  note  2).  The  connection  of  the  two 
sections  by  means  of  a  copulative  "j^  despite  the 
diflference  in  the  time  of  their  composition,  ia 
probably  owing  to  the  circumstance  that  at  the 
close  of  chap  v.  only  the  beginning  of  the  ful- 
filment of  the  oracle  addressed  to  Belshazzar 
had  been  noticed,  whUe  the  principal  fact, 
which  concludes  the  fulfilment,  ia  reserved  for 
the  narrative  in  the  present  section ;  cf.  on 
chap.  V.  30.  — For  the  view  that  ■'Darius  the 
Mede  "  can  only  designate  Cyaxares,  the  son  of 
Astyages  and  father-in-law  of  Cyrus,  see  In- 
trod ,  §  8,  note  4,  Perhaps  the  Sept,  also  re- 
ferred to  this  Cyaxares,  when  it  translated  thia 
passage  Kui  'A/^ra^f/yfp/f  6  ruv  Mt}{^uiv  Trapi/a^iev 
rifv  jiu(n?.£inv  Kai  tlapelo^  77'Ai/pr/(^  ruv  i/iiepijv  Kal 
Ivin^or  er  y'lpif,  hy  ' ApraifpiTiq  they  may  have 
intended  Astyages,  the  father  of  Darius  Medus, 
and  by  the  predicate  '^'iipiK  ^'■>.,  which  they 
applied  to  Darius,  they  may  have  attempted  to 
repeat  the  l"'"!?'  "r?  of  the  second  half  of  the 
verse  (cf.  Michaelis,  Oriental.  Bibl,  iv.  20). 
Despite  the  marked  ignorance  of  history  which 
the  Alexandrians  occasionally  reveal,  they  can 
hardly  be  presumed  to  have  been  guilty  of  the 
gross  anachronism  of  confounding  the  Median 
Darius  with  Darius  Nothus,  the  son  of  Artax- 
erxes  I.  Longimanus  (against  Hiivernick).-- 
Ebrard  (Die  Offenbarung  Joluinnis  [in  Olshau 
sen's  Bibl.  Kommcntar],  p,  5.5  et  seq, .  and  in  a 
review  of  Fuller's  Prophet  Daniel  in  the  G  ■  ters 
lohe  AUg.  literar.  Anzeiger,  October,  1868,  p 
267),  attempts,  in  harmony  with  his  assumption 


CHAP.  VI.  1-39. 


13t 


that  Belshazzar  was  identical  with  Laborasoar- 
chad.  to  identify  Darius  the  Mede  with  Naboni- 
du8,  whom  the  conspirators  who  slew  Labora- 
loarchad  elevated  to  the  throne  (similarly  Syn- 
cellus,  Scaliger,  Petavius  and  Buddeus).  In 
this  way  he  certainly  succeeds  in  removing 
every  difference  between  the  time  of  chap.  v. 
30  and  vi.  1  ;  but  he  neglects  to  notice  (1) 
that  Laboraso.irchad  was  a  grandson  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, instead  of  being  his  son,  as  chap  v. 
11  et  seq.  requires;  (2)  that  Nabonidus,  accord- 
ing to  the  express  statement  of  Berosus,  was  not 
of  Median,  but  of  Babylonian  descent,  although 
not  of  royal  blood  ;  (S)  that  according  to  vs.  9, 

13,  and  10  (the  "  laws  of  the  Medes  and  Per- 
sians ")  the  administration  of  the  king  in  ques- 
tion is  characterized,  in  the  plainest  maimer,  as 
modelled  and  organized  after  the  Medo-Persian 
code,  rather  than  the  Babylonian ;  (4)  that  the 
system   of  espionage  and  denunciation  (vs.  13, 

14,  lli),  the  barbarous  custom  of  executing  the 
families  of  criminals  (v.  3.5)  together  with  the 
culprit,  and  also  the  aristocratic  constitutional 
procedure  connected  with  the  promulgation  of 
the  prohibition  and  with  the  sealing  of  the 
stone  (vs.  8,  18),  all  likewise  refer  to  specifically 
Medo-Persian  arrangements,  such  as  could  not 
yet  have  been  introduced  under  Nabonidus. 
These  arguments  will  also  hold  good  against 
A.  Scheuchzer,  of  Zurich,  who,  without  refer- 
ence to  Ebrard,  and  to  some  extent  basing  his 
Tiews  on  different  grounds,  has  recently  likewise 
attempted  to  identify  Xabonidus  with  Darius 
the  Mede  (Asoi/rUche  Fofschuitgen,  in  Heiden- 
helm's  Vierteljithrsschrift  fiir  engl.-theolog.  For- 
ichung,  vol.  IV.,  No.  1,  p.  17  et  seq.). — 
["The  addition  of  »""!'?  (Kethib)  forms  on 
the  one  hand  a  contrast  to  the  expression,  '  the 
king  of  the  Chaldaeans'  (chap.  v.  30),  and  on 
the  other  hand  it  points  forward  to  S«"^C"1D- 
ver.  29  (28);  it,  however,  furnishes  no  proof 
that  Daniel  distinguished  the  Median  kingdom 
from  the  Persian  ;  for  the  kingdom  is  not  called 
a  Bledian  kingdom,  but  it  is  only  said  of  Darius 
that  he  was  of  Median  descent,  and,  ver.  29  (28), 
that  Cynic  the  Persian  succeeded  him.  In 
,5i^'  ''«  received  the  kingdom,  it  is  indicated 
that  Darius  did  not  conquer  it,  but  received  it 
from  the  conqueror" (/li'i'i).] — Being  about  three- 
score and  two  years  old.  This  precise  and  con- 
crete designation  of  his  age  was  hardly  designed 
to  note  that  he  had  overthrown  the  Chaldiean  em- 
pire after  attaining  to  old  age  and  when  he  was 
DO  longer  competeut  to  the  personal  conduct  of 
warlike  operations  (Kranichfeld) ;  for  such  a 
purpose  is  not  expressed  with  sufficient  rlear- 
ness,  and  moreover,  the  implied  reference  to 
the  weakness  and  defenceless  condition  of  the 
declining  Babylonian  empire  would  involve  a 
historical  maccuracy  which  cannot  well  be 
ohai'ged  against  the  author.  The  real  motive 
that  led  hiui  to  mention  the  age  of  Darius  can 
only  consist  in  the  design  to  refer  to  the  consid- 
erably later  time  of  the  taking  of  Babylon, 
in  its  relation  to  the  events  that  had  just  been 
described  (cf.  supra,  on  chap.  v.  30).* 

Verses  2,  3  [1,  3J.   The  new  constitution,  of  tJie 


•  [Rather  it  may  have  been  as  a  premonition  of  the  short 
Interval  duriag  D.irius's  rule  before  the  ftiU  assumption  of 
Aaminiou  by  C^tus  lu  person  at  Baby lun,] 


empire  under  Darius,  and  the  position  assigned 
to  Daniel.  It  pleased  Darius  to  set  over  the 
kingdom  a  hundred  and  tvrenty  princes. 
The  Sept.  increases  this  number  to  127,  proba- 
bly with  a  reference  to  Esth.  i.  1.  Josephus 
Ant.  X.  13  multiplies  it  by  three  (eir/nnvrn  koi 
TjiiahOo^oL  cnTfid-ai),  perhaps  because  he  believed 
each  of  the  three  chief  prtefects  to  have  been 
placed  over  120  satraps,  or  because  he  believed 
himself  obliged  to  make  the  number  of  satrapies 
equal  to  that  of  the  day s  in  the  year.  The  num  • 
her  130  is  to  be  retained,  in  opposition  to  both 
these  uncritical  attempts  to  enlarge  it,  although 
no  other  authorities  mention  so  large  a  number 
of  satrapies  or  provinces  in  the  Medo-Persian 
empire  at  the  time  of  its  first  organization  under 
Darius-Cyaxares  and  Cyrus,  and  although  ac- 
cording to  both  Herodotus  and  Xenophon  their 
number  seems  to  have  bsen  considerably  smaller 
at  that  period.  The  former  of  these  authors 
mentions  no  definite  organization  of  satrapies  by 
Cyrus  whatever,  and  remarks  of  Darius  Hystas- 
pis  that  he  founded  in  all  only  ttcen  ty  of  such 
provinces  for  the  whole  empire  (III.  89) ;  the 
latter  notices  satraps  under  Cyrus  as  well,  but 
mentions  only  nine,  eight  of  whom  were  ap- 
pointed for  Asia  Minor  and  one  for  Arabia — 
from  which  it  might  be  concluded  that  the  ag- 
gregate number  of  such  officials  did  not  much 
exceed  twenty,  and  perhaps,  did  not  even  reach 
that  number  ( Cyrop.  VII.  4,  2  ;  VIII.  G).  The 
statements  of  these  Greek  historians  do  not, 
however,  compel  us  to  doubt  the  accuracy  of 
Daniel's  report,  or  to  reduce  the  number  from 
1 20  to  20 ;  for  various  indications  lead  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  number  and  boundaries  of 
the  satrapies  varied  exceedingly  in  different  pe- 
riods of  the  Persian  empire.  The  three  lists  of 
Persian  provinces,  for  instance,  which  are  found 
among  the  inscriptions  of  Darius  (at  Persepolis, 
at  Behistun,  and  at  Nakshi  Rustam)  enumerate 
on  the  whole  thirty-three  satrapies  or  provinces, 
without  permitting  us  to  regard  the  number  as 
exhaustively  complete.  The  opinion  that  such 
changes  among  the  satrapies  actually  occurred 
is  further  supported  by  Ezra  viii.  30,  where 
sereral  satraps  beyond  the  Euphrates  are  men- 
tioned as  holding  office  under  Artaxerxes,  whik 
Herodotus,  III.  91,  knew  of  but  one;  and  alsc 
by  Esth.  i.  1,  where  the  whole  number  of  the 
Persian  satrapies  is  fixed  at  137,  etc.  Hence, 
it  must  probably  be  assumed  that  at  different 
times  the  arrangement  of  provinces  varied  in 
the  Persian  empire,  and  that  a  subdivision  of 
the  realm  into  numerous  smaller  sections  (whose 
number,  120,  may  have  been  symbolically  sig- 
nificant, and  relating  to  astronomical  condi- 
tions) existed  already  under  Darius- Medus  and 
Cyrus,  but  in  such  a  manner  that  in  addition  a 
reckoning  by  larger,  and  consequently  less  nu- 
merous provinces,  was  customary.  The  divi- 
sion into  130  smaller  satrapies  may  have  descend- 
ed to  the  Medo-Persians  from  the  Chaldaeo- 
Babylonian  world-kingdom,  in  which,  according 
to  chap.  iii.  3,  37,  the  title  of  satrap  had  long 
been  known,  and  on  account  of  its  almost  sacred 
astronomical  importance,  they  may  have  gladly 
admitted  it  into  the  constitution  of  their  realm. 
The  enumeration  by  larger  and  less  numeroua 
(30-30)  satrapies  may  h  ive  been  chiefly  in  use 
in  the  official  language  of  the  court  and  the 
arts  in  the  kingdom  of  the  Achsemenidae,  as  being 


140 


THE  PKOPHET  DANIEL. 


a  natioaal  Medo-Persian  institution,  aud  for  that 
reason  may  have  been  principally  or  exclusively 
observed  by  the  Greeks.  The  Biblical  enumera- 
tion, having  ,■»  Babylonian  origin,  may  therefore 
be  properly  designated  as  the  esoteric  or  hieratic, 
and  the  ancient  Aryan  division,  supported  by  the 
classics,  as  the  eiotcric  or  demotic.  Jsor  is  it  a 
questionable  feature  that  on  this  explanation 
the  title  kshntrapa  (nJwitrapaiti,  achashdnrpan) 
was  applied  interchangeably  to  the  administra- 
tors of  both  larger  and  smaller  divisions ;  since 
this  harmonizes  well  with  the  fluctuations  of 
later  Hellenistic  writers  in  rendering  the  word 
and  especially  with  the  indecision  of  the  Sept. 
On  this  question,  and  in  relation  to  the  origin 
and  significance  of  the  title  of  satr,ip,  cf.  the 
exeg.  remarks  on  chap.  ui.  3. — Verse  3  [31]. 
And  over  these  three  presidents,  of  whom 
Daniel  was  first;  rather,  "'was  one."  [The 
following  verse,  however,  shows  that  he  was  the 
principal  one].  The  li:")?  (in  the  Targ.  equiv- 
alent to  C^^l-',  "arrangers,  overseers")  were 
certainly  "  chief -prfefects,  princes,  ministers," 
whether  the  'nno  is  regarded  as  related  to  ~B, 
l'.  e. ,  as  derived,  by  means  of  the  Pers.  particle  of 
derivation  rr,  from  the  Zend  mra  (Gr.  Kapa, 
Pers.  ser),  '"  head,"  or  as  related  to  the  Sanscr. 
(^araiia.  "protector,"  or  also  to  turakti,  "steers- 
man" (the  former  according  to  Gesenius,  the 
latter,  to  Hitzig).  The  dignity  of  these 
^Smvkin  was  doubtless  identical  with  that  of 
the  J'li/lain  or  "triumvirs,"  who  are  mentioned 
in  the  preceding  chapter  (vs.  7,  16,  29)  as  the 
superior  princes  of  the  realm,  or  heads  of  the 
government  under  Belshazzar.  Accordingly, 
like  the  120  satraps,  they  were  a  cla.ss  of  digni- 
taries in  the  Medo-Persian  kingdom,  whose 
office  was  modelled  after  the  Babylonian  pre- 
cedent, but  was  discontinued  at  a  later  period, 
or  perhaps,  was  developed  into  the  institution 
of  the  seven  counsellors  of  the  Persian  kings 
(corresponding  to  the  seven  Amshaspands— cf. 
Esth.  i.  14;  Ezra  vii.  14;  Herod.  III.  31). 
Daniel  owed  his  elevation  to  this  rank  to  the 
cii-cumstance  that  he  had  already  been  raised  to 
the  dignity  of  a  triumvir  by  Belshazzar.  and  had 
probably  remained  in  that  office  until  the  over- 
throw of  the  Chaldasan  kingdom  ;  as  also 
Nebuchadnezzar,  according  to  chap.  ii.  48.  49, 
had  already  conferred  on  him  a  position  of  dis- 
tinguished political  and  priestly  power  and  emi- 
nence.— That  the  princes  (satraps)  might  give 
accounts  to  them  and  the  king  should  have 
no  damage,  i.e.,  not  suffer  loss  in  his  revenues 
(cf.  p.':  Ezra  iv.  13,  15,  and  pr  Esth.  vii.  4). 
The  satraps  are  thus  designated  more  particu- 
larly as  officers  ot  fimince,  which  doubtless  con- 
stituted one  of  their  chief  functions;  cf.  Herod. 
III.  89  et  seq. 

Verses  4,  5  [3,  4].  The  iU-wiU  <f  the  other 
grand  njpcials  of  (he  realm  against  Daniel. 
'fhen  th.>;  Daniel  was  preferred  above  (showed 
himself  superior  to)  the  presidents,  etc.  nr:~^i 
"distinguished  himself,  outshone  them."  The 
demonstrative  n:~,  "this,"  which  is  connected 
with  the  name  of  Daniel  only  here  and  in  v.  30, 
is  conceived  and  spoken  from  the  standpoint  of 
his  opponents,  who  look  with  envy  on  him 
{i»tum)  whom  God  has  hitherto  so  highly  favored 


with  His  assistance.     In  this  way  the  succeed- 
ing remark,  ' '  because  an  excellent  spirit  was  in 
him  "  (cf.  chap.  v.  12),  may  hkewise  be  explained 
without  involving  any  suspicion  of  self-laudatiou 
on  the   part   of   the  narrator. — And  the  king 
,  thought  to  set  him  over  the  w^hole  realm, 
hence,  to  promote   him  to   the  office  of  grand- 
vizier  or  prime  minister — the  superior  of   the 
I   "  triumvirs  "  or  Sarekin.     The  Targums  alwayi 
!  employ  the  Ithpael  for  the  intransitive  "^V-^?,  "  to 
be  inclined,  to  purpose."     ["This  intention  of 
i  the  king  stirred  up  the  envy  of  the  other  presi 
dents"  (KeiV)]. — Verse  5  [4].  Then  the  presi- 
dents ....  sought  to  find  occasion  against 
j  Daniel    concerning    the    kingdom,    i.e.,    they 
i  sought  to  assail  his  official  character ;   and  only 
I  after  frequent  proofs  that  their  efforts  in  this 
direction  were  futile,  did  they  direct  their  atten- 
tion to  his  religious  standpoint  (v.  6  et  seq.).* — 
But  they  could  find  none  occasion  nor  fault. 
i"iS",  as   before,   is  an  "  occasion,  opportunity, 
pretext,"  upon  which  the  accusation   might  be 
based    ["as  ahia,  John  xviii.    38;  Matt,   xxvii. 
37,  an  occation for  impeachment"  (Keil)].     This 
more   general  term  may  be   co-ordinated  with 
nri"'rTr,  "  wickedness,"  because  it  is  conceived 
concretely  or  objectively ;  and  hence  also  with 
the  following  ib'J,  "  fault,  inadvertence  "  (from 
nb'.r,  the  probable  primitive  form  for  r!3",13 ;  cf. 
in  the  Gr.  fju/.u-  and  /'oj'i).     Fidelity  is  the  lead- 
ing political  virtue  of  the  sei-vant  or  officer  of  a 
government  (cf.  1  Cor.  iv.  2).  in  like  manner  as 
justice  and  mercy  should  be  the  ornament  of 
rulers  (chap.  iv.  34). 

Verses  6-10  [5-9].  The  procuring  of  a  gotem- 
mental  edict  pertaining  to  religiein,  directed  against 
Daniel.\  We  shall  not  ....  against  this 
Daniel, excepttve  find  it  against  him  concern- 
ing the  law  of  hJs  God.  ri~b?«  P^,  the  law  of 
Daniel's  God.  is  the  theocratic  law,  considered 
as  the  rule  of  his  religious  life,  and  especially  of 
his  devotional  exercises.  Cf.  HT  in  Ezra  vii.  0, 
13,  14,  31,  35,  36  ;  and  supra,  chap.  ii.  9. — Verse 
7.  Then  these  presidents  (princes)  and  princes 
(satraps)  assembled  together  to  the  king ; 
rather  (as  marg. ),  "ran  in  stormy  haste." 
"  These  princes  and  satraps  "  (cf.  "  these  men," 
V.  6  [a])  were  not,  of  course,  aU  ot  them,  with- 
out exception,  but  only  those  who  envied  and 
sought  to  calumniate  Daniel,  since  only  such  are 
here  concerned  ;  cf.  v  35  [34].  The  idea  that 
all  the  satraps  participated  is  the  more  improba- 
ble, in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  possible  presence 
of  all  in  the  metropolis  is  nowhere  indicate  i  (nf  t 

*  ["  Such  a  model  of  excellence.  Ro  far  surp.issiog  and  feo 
nncomfort'ibly  eclipsing  themselves,  was  lieerl.v  cutting  to 
these  corrupt  officers,  and  aroused  their  bitterest  hostility." 
— Coicie'i.] 

t  [*'  With  Satanic  cunning  the  princes  shaped  tius  proposed 
law  to  tike  with  the  king  by  a  bait  for  his  low  vanity,  and 
to  entrap  Daniel  through  his  known  decision  liiid  firmness 
in  the  worsiiip  of  his  God.  It  was  the  best  compUmcnt  they 
could  pay  to  Ilaniel  that  they  assumed  so  conlideiitly  that  be 
would  pray  to  God  none  the  less  for  this  monstrous  law.  It 
was  the  keenest  reproach  to  their  king  that  they  should  an- 
ticipate hie  rendy  assent  to  such  a  law  under  the  impulses 
of  his  excessive  vanity.  Uarius  was  a  weak  and  vain  king, 
eUu  he  would  have  asked.  What  can  be  the  motive  of  the8€ 
men  iii  proposing  such  a  law  ?  Tlainly  the  appended  e,xcei> 
tion,  *  Save  of  thee,  O  king,^  was  so  .grateful  to  hi*  vanitj 
that  it  blinded  his  dull  eye  to  the  monstrous  nature  &rd  po« 
Bible  b'urings  of  this  law." — Cowieti.^ 


CHAP.  VI.  l-2y. 


141 


BTen  in  V.  8  LTD- — On  -•■'31Si  "to  rush  any- 
where in  stormy  haste,  to  rush  anywhere  fre- 
quently''  [rather,  tumultuously]  (Luther,  '■  came 
often  "),  cf.  the  German  "jema/iden  die  Thure 
fiturmeu'^  ("to  storm  somebody's  door");  see 
infra,  vs.  13  [11]  and  16  [15].— Verse  8.  AU  the 
presidents  (princes)  of  the  kingdom,  the  gov- 
ernors, and  th9  princes  (satrap.s),  the  counsel- 
lors, and  the  captains  ipraifects)  have  consulted 
together ;  rather,  ' '  have  considered  it  advisa- 
ble." 1"r~?  seems  here  to  be  employed  in  a 
more  extended  sense  than  heretofore  (vs.  3  [3] , 
5  [4],  and  T  [(!]).  where  it  designates  the  chief - 
prasfects  who  were  placed  over  the  satraps ;  * 
for  the  four  classes  of  officials  which  follow — the 
same  as  in  chap  iii.  37,  but  in  a  different  order 
— are  evidentlj-  intended  to  specialize  the  pre- 
fixed general  idea  of  "princes"  or  '"  pnefects" 
(thus  Chr.  B.  Michaelis  correctly,  against  Hitzig 
and  others,  who  in  this  place  also  reg.ard  the 
Sarekin  as  the  chief  praefects  who  were  Daniel's 
colleagues)  In  like  manner  the  term  Chaldse- 
ans  was  found  to  be  employed  above,  at  one 
time  to  designate  a  special  class  of  wise  men, 
and  at  another  to  denote  the  whole  order  of 
magians  (see  on  chap.  ii.  3).f — In  relation  to 
^?r"^^,  "to  determine  or  agree  among  them- 
selves," compare  the  term  ^?'^,  "a  counsellor," 
coiuiliarius,  as  designating  one  of  the  principal 
officers  of  the  Persian  king,  Ezra  vii.  14,  15. — 
To  establish  a  royal  statute ;  rather,  "that the 
king  should  establish  a  statute."  In  view  of  the 
accentuation,  8*2;^  is  not  to  be  construed  with 
D"p  as  a  genitive  ("  to  establish  a  royal  statute," 

•  ["  If  we  compare  the  list  of  the  four  official  classes  here 
meDtioned  with  that  of  the  great  officers  of  state  under  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, ch.  iii.  2,  the  naming  of  the  i<'?t;30   before 

the  S':E~Ti)n6«  (»a«roi>»,  while  inch.  iii.  2  they  are  named 
after  them)  shows  that  the  K^IHO  are  here  great  officers 
to  whom  the  satraps  were  subordinate,  and  that  only  the 
three  ^''^"O  could  be  meant  to  whom  the  satraps  had  to 
render  an  account.  Moreover,  the  list  of  four  names  is 
divided  by  the  copula  T  into  two  classes.  To  the  first  class 
belong  the  K^Z30   and  the  satraps;   to  the  second  the 

Vl^'^n,  »tate  counciUora,  and  the  ^^r^^B,  civil  pra- 
fectJl  of  tke  provinces.  Accordingly,  we  will  scarcely  err 
If  by  S':30   we  understand  the  member)  of  the  highest 

council  of  state^  by  S^'niS^n  the  ministers  or  members 

of  the  (lotcer)  slate  councU,  and  by  the  satmps  and  pec/ias 
the  milittiri/  and  civil  rulers  of  the  provinces.  This  group- 
ing of  the  names  confirms,  consequently,  the  general  inter- 
pretation of  the  8<riiri^   13ID   ^3,  for  the  four  classes 

named  constitute  the  entire  chief  prefecture  of  the  king- 
dom. This  interpretation  is  not  made  questionable  by  the 
fact  that  the  '^"'D^.O   had  in  the  kingdom  of  Darius  a  dif- 

"erent  position  from  that  they  held  in  the  kingdom  of 
Nebuchadnezzar ;  for  in  this  respect  each  kingdom  had  its 
own  particular  arrangement,  which  underwent  manifold 
changes  according  to  the  times." — Ketl.'\ 

t  ["  The  whole  connection  of  the  narrative  plainly  shows 
that  the  authors  of  the  accusation  deceived  the  king.  The 
council  of  state,  or  cliief  court,  to  which  all  the  satraps  had 
to  render  an  acc-'unt,  consisted  of  three  men.  of  whom 
Daniel  was  one.  But  Daniel  certainly  was  not  called  to  this 
consultation;  therefore  their  pretence  that  ail  "presidents 
of  the  kingdom' had  consulted  on  the  matter,  was  false. 
Besides,  they  deceived  the  king  in  this,  that  they  concealed 
from  him  the  intention  of  the  decree,  or  misled  him  regard- 
ing  it."   -A'e«.] 


etc.),  but  must  be  regarded  as  the  subject  of  the 
Inf.  r!"l"p*.  so  that  the  object  -"I^  is  placed 
between  tl  e  im'jiitive  and  its  noun,  as  in  Isa.  v. 
34  ;  xix.  8 ;  xx.  1  (thus  correctly  Rosenmiiller, 
Hitzig,  Kranichfeld,  [Keil].  etc.,  against  Theo- 
dotion,  Vulgate.  Luther,  Bertholdt,  and  a  ma- 
jority of  modems).  * — And  make  a  firm  inter- 
dict (marg.).  The  '^'p,  which  the  king  was  to 
establish,  is  at  the  same  time  an  "l^?*-  ''inter- 
dict ; "  in  the  parallelism  of  the  address  it  is  at 
first  designated  generally  as  a  "statute,"  and 
afterwards  more  especially  as  an  "interdict.*' 
On  '"'".!<,  "to  bind,"  in  the  sense  of  "to  pro- 
hibit," see  Num.  xxx.  10,  and  also  the  X.-T. 
Sim'  as  the  opposite  of  >-ica'.  Matt.  xvi.  19  ; 
xviii.  18.- — That  whosoever  shall  ask  a  petition 
....  for  thirty  days;  i.e.,  during  the  thirty 
days  next  ensuing,  from  that  time  until  the 
expiration  of  thirty  days.  Literally,  "unto 
thirty  days."  This  number,  the  triplicate  of 
the  ten  days  in  chap.  i.  13-15,  is  a  round  num- 
ber, corresponding  to  the  duration  of  a  month, 
and  employed  otherwise  also  as  a  general  period, 
during  which  an  interdict  was  imposed  on  per- 
sons ;  e.g.,  by  the  vows  of  Xazarites.  Acts  xxi. 
36  ;  cf.  Tract,  yusir.  I.  3  ;  Joseph.,  de  B.  Jud., 
II.  15,  1. — The  command  (or  interdict)  to  pray  f 
during  one  month  only  to  the  king  was  in  this 
instance  specially  aimed  at  Daniel,  the  pious 
worshipper  of  Jehovah,  for  the  purpose  of  en- 
trapping him  ;  but  it  was  suggested  by  a  national 
reUgious  custom  of  older  date  among  the  Jled^s, 
by  which  Divine  honors  were  rendered  to  the 
king.  Herodotus.  I.  199.  refers  to  this  custom, 
when  he  remarks  that  Deioces  had  introduced 
the  Trepi  iavrov  geuvveiv  for  himself  and  his  suc- 
cessors, by  removing  his  person  from  the  obser- 
vation of  his  subjects,  in  order  to  persuade  them 
that  he  was  erf/io/oc  (cf.  also  Xenophon,  Cyrop. , 
I.  3,  18).  The  existence  of  this  custom  among 
the  Medes  is  further  substantiated  by  the  fact 
that  the  Persians,  who  were  intimately  related 
to  the  Medes,  observed  it,  as  did  several  others 
of  the  Oriental  nations  of  antiquity  {e.g.,  the 
Egyptians  and  Ethiopians,  according  to  Diodor. , 
Sicut.,  1.  90;  III.  3,  5 1 — the  former  from  the 
peculiar  reUgious  reason  that  they  considered 
the  king  as  the  "offspring  of  the  gods"  (ficjoi'of 
ijfiji)  and  the  image  of  Ormuzd,  and  even  ad- 
dressed him  directly  as  tftdr ;  cf.  .dJschylus, 
Pers.,  157,  855;  Plutarch,   Tkemist.,  37;  Cur- 

•  [But  this  construction  is  extremely  harsh,  and,  as  Len- 
gerke  remarks,  opposed  to  the  usage  of  5t3*?2   ""OK  in  r. 

1.3.  Even  Rosenmiiller  renders  (apparently  by  inadvertence, 
however)  decreto  regto.  The  pas,sages  adduced  by  the  au- 
thor from  Isaiah  (lix.  8  is  not  correct)  are  not  altogether  in 
point,  as  the  preposition  there  is  not  ^,  but  "2  or  2,  Had 
the  writer  intended  such  a  construction  he  would  naturailj 
have  used  ^T  with  the  fut.  The  Masoretic  iLttrpuno- 
tion,  however,  undeniably  favors  it.] 
t  [The  term  "  ^73  is  here  not  any  kind  of  request  or 

supplication,  bat  prayer,  as  the  phrase,  ver.  14  (13),  K^S' 
nri^rS.   directing  his  prayer,  shows.      The  word  ^IKT 

does  not  prove  the  contrary,  for  the  heathen  prayed  also  u 
men  (cf.  ch.  ii.  4(i).  and  here  the  clause,  except  to  the  king 
places  together  god  and  man,  so  that  the  king  might  not 
observe  that  the  prohibition  was  specially  directed  agamtf 
Daniel." — Keil. 


142 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


tins,  VIII.  5,  11 ;  Isocrates,  Panegyr..  in  Brisso- 
nius,  de  Fersar.  princ,  p.  17,  and  generally, 
Hengstenberg,  Anthentie  des  Daniel,  etc.,  p.  127 
et  seq. ;  Delitzsch,  Art.  Daniel  in  Herzog's  Beal- 
Encykl.,  p.  378  et  seq.  See  the  Ethico-fuud.  prin- 
ciples, etc. ,  against  the  assumption  of  the  modem 
psendo-Daniel  tendency-criticism,  on  which  the 
edict  of  Darius  in  question  is  a  cunningly  in- 
vented prototype,  and  at  the  same  time  an  ex- 
aggerated caricature  of  the  course  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  as  described  in  1  Mace.  i.  41  et  seq.  ; 
2  Mace.  vi.  1  et  seq. — Verse  9  [8].  Now,  O 
king,  establish  the  decree  and  sign  the  writ- 
ing ;  rather,  "and  record  the  writing,"  for  c"i"1 
always  signifies  to  record,  and  not  to  sign  ;  and 
moreover,  the  Persian  edicts  received  their  offi- 
cial stamp  as  laws  from  the  royal  seal,  instead 
of  the  royal  signature  ;  *  cf.  Esth.  iii.  10  et  seq.  ; 
viii.  8.  — Thai  it  be  not  changed,  according  to 
the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  i.e..  accord- 
ing to  that  law  of  the  united  Medo-Persian 
realm,  as  is  somewhat  more  fully  described  in  v. 
16  [15],  by  which  every  official  edict  from  the 
king,  issued  with  certain  formalities,  should  pos- 
sess enduring  force  as  law,  hence,  "should  not 
be  changed  "  (IT^Drrii  H^,  cf.  Winer,   Gramm. , 

§  46,  3) ;  cf.  Estk;  i.  19 ;  viii.  8.  Against  the 
opinion  of  Von  Lengerke,  that  the  writer  here 
was  guilty  of  an  anachronism,  since  the  phrase 
"  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians  "  must  have 
originated  subsequently  to  the  time  of  Cjtus,  cf . 
supra.  Hitzig  also  rejects  this  position  of  Von 
Lengerke.  inasmuch  as  he  denies,  for  telling 
reasons,  the  presumption  on  which  it  rests,  that 
TT  in  that  formula  designates  the  whole  body  of 
laws  of  the  kingdom.  — [Verse  10  (9).  "  The  king 
carried  out  the  proposal.  '*'^,9-'!^1  i^  exphcative  : 
the  writing,  namely,  the  prohibition  (spoken  of); 
for  this  was  the  chief  matter,  therefore  '''39?^ 
alone  is  here  mentioned,  and  not  also  D"p  (edict), 
ver.  8(7)."— /tVa] 

Verses  11,  12  [10,  11].  DanieFs  protest,  t>y  his 
conduct,  against  the  royal  decree.^  And,  his 
windows  being  open  in  his  chamber  toward 
Jerusalem;  rather,  "but  he  [itfl  had  open 
windows,"  etc.  The  upper  chamber,  or  attic, 
receives  consideration  as  being  more  removed 
and  less  liable  to  be  disturbed,  hence  as  being 
particularly  adapted  to  purposes  of  devotion ;  cf. 

*  [This  distinction  is  ratiier  ovev-nice;  for  it  was  not  the 
engrosHinij  of  the  edict,  surely,  that  the  magnates  desired. 
and  this  of  conrse  would  not  have  been  done  by  the  royal 
hand,  but  his  official  approval  and  sanction,  such  as  a  signa- 
ture— whether  by  writing  or  stamping  the  name — only  could 
confer.) 

t  [*'  The  satraps  did  not  wait  long  for  Daniel's  expected 
disregard  of  the  kinpr's  prohibition.  .  .  .  He  continued 
this  custom  (of  prayer)  even  aft«r  the  issuing  of  the  edict ; 
for  a  discontinuance  of  it  on  account  of  that  law  would  have 
been  a  denying  of  the  f.Mth  and  a  sinning  against  God.  On 
this  his  enemies  had  reckoned.  They  secretly  watched  him, 
and  immediately  reported  his  disregard  of  the  k  ng's  com- 
mand. In  ver.  11  (10).  the  place  where  he  was  wont  to 
pray  is  more  particularly  described  in  order  that  it  might  be 
shown  how  they  could  ob^rve  him." — Keii.'] 

t  ["  nb  does  not  refer  to  Daniel  ('he  had  opened  win- 
dows '),  but  to  nn"^3  J,  his  house  had  open  windown.  If 
ni  referred  to  Daniel,  then  the  K^.1  following  would  be 
mpernuo  IS." — Keil.    The  same  remark  of  course  ^viU  apply 

io  nn'brs  fouowug.] 


2  Sam.  xix.  1  ;  1  Kings  xvii.  20;  Acts  i.  13;  x. 
9. — "Opened  windows,"  I^Tr  V'!?,  are  the 
opposite  of  such  as  are  covered  with  lattice-wora 
(l?airiy  p^S,  Ezek.  xl  IG)  by  which  the  view  is 

ob'Sitructed.  These  open  w-indows  were  required 
to  be  "  toward  Jerusalem,"  because  according 
to  ancient  custom  the  face  of  the  worshipper 
must  be  turned  towards  the  temple  in  that  city ; 
for  as  in  Jerusalem  the  supplicant  turned  to- 
ward the  sanctuary  (Psa.  v.  8  ;  xxviii.  2  etc.), 
so  he  turned  when  abroad  towards  the  "  holy 
city"  (Matt.  iv.  5)  as  the  site  of  the  temple. 
This  was  the  case  long  prior  to  the  captivity ; 
see  1  Kings  viii.  33,  35,  38,  44,  48 ;  2  Chron. 
vi.  29,  34,  38.  The  corresponding  custom 
among  the  Mahommedans  (Kibla)  with  refer- 
ence to  Mecca,  appears  thus  to  be  the  imitation 
of  a  custom  developed  on  the  primitive  soil  of 
Bible  lands ;  and  for  the  e.irliest  followers  of 
Islam  Jerusalem  itself  was  Kibla.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  ancient  Jewish  and  the  most  ancient 
Christian  custom  prohibited,  on  the  ground  of 
Ezek.  viii.  16,  17,  the  turning  of  the  face  in 
prayer  towards  the  east,  i.e..  towards  the  sun 
(cf.  Clement,  Strom.  VII.  724 ;  Origen.  Hnmil. 
V.  in  Num. ;  Tertull.  Apol.  e.  16).  whUe  the 
later  church,  standing  on  the  ground  of  MaL 
iiL  20;  Luke  i.  78  et  seq.,  zealously  recom- 
mended that  supplicants  and  houses  for  prayer 
should  face  towards  the  east,  and  introduced  it 
into  geueral  use.  Cf.  Bingham,  Origines,  V. 
275  ss. — He  kneeled  upon  his  knees  three 
limes  a  day.  Kneeling  is  mentioned  as  the 
characteristic  posture  of  supplicants  in  1  Kings 
viii.  54 ;  3  Chron.  vi.  13 ;  Ezra  ix.  o ;  Luke 
xxii.  41  ;  Acts  vii.  59  ;  ix.  40 ;  xxi.  5 ;  Eph. 
iii.  14  ;  (ilem.  Rom.  1  Cor.  48  ;  Hernias,  Pas- 
t«r.  Vis.  I.  1,  etc.  Cf.  O.  A.  Hubnenis,  de  gen- 
vflexione  (Halle,  1741) ;  Z'jckler.  Krit.  Geschichte 
der  Askese  (Frankf.  and  Erlangen,  1863),  p.  350 
et  seq.  —  ["Daniel  offered  prayers  not  to  make 
an  outward  show,  for  only  secret  spies  could  ob 
serve  him  when  so  engaged.  ''"  ;|:p";S  does 
not  mean  altogether  so  as  (Rosenmiiller,  Von 
Leng. ,  Maurer,  Hitzig),  but,  as  always,  on  this 
account  that,  because.  Because  he  always  did 
thus,  so  now  he  continues  to  do  it" — {Keil).]* 
The  custom  of  praying  three  times  in  a  day, 
which  is  attested  for  the  first  time  in  this  pas- 
sage, and  which,  according  to  the  Tahnudic  tra- 
dition was  first  brought  into  general  use  among 
the  Jews  by  the  "  men  of  the  great  synagogue," 
appears  to  have  taken  shape  during  the  Baby- 
lonian captivity  as  a  usage  observed  by  pious  in- 
dividuals among  the  Israelites.  The  fundamental 
general  idea  of  this  custom  is  already  expressed 
in  Psa.  Iv.  18;  but  the  desire  to  find  a  regular 
substitute  for  the  morning  and  evening  sacri- 
fices, which  were  now  iuteirupted,  doulitlesa 
contributed  towards  originating  the  custom, 
since  the  Jews  were  accustomed,  from  an  early 
period,  to  regard  prayer  as  in  itself  a  sacrifice 
with  which  God  is  pleased  ( Hos.  xiv.  3  ;  Psa, 
li  1 7 ;  cxvi.  17,  etc. ),  and  especially  since  they 
associated  it  in  their  minds  with  the  evening 
sacrifice  (Psa.  cxli.  3  ;   1  Kings  xviii.  36  et  seq.; 


*['' Blessed  man  !  How  quietly,  how  calmly,  how  p^aoe- 
fully  did  thy  heart  repose  on  the  cniiuriop  love  and  faith 
fulness  of  the  never-failing  power  of  thy  fathers'  Gol  1  * 
— Cuicles,] 


CHAP.  VI.   1-39. 


143 


Eira  ix.  5  ;  cf.  Dan.  ix.  21).  The  Parsee  custom 
of  rendering  Divine  honors  to  the  three  parts  of 
the  day  themselves,  has.  of  course,  nothing  in 
common  with  the  habit  of  the  Jews  and  prim- 
itive Christians  (Acts  iii.  1 ;  x.  9,  30  ;  cf.  Pusey, 
Daniel,  p.  ooi) ;  nor  has  the  custom  of  the 
Egyptian  priests,  who,  according  to  Porphyry, 
de  ahitinent.  IV.  8,  sang  daily  four  hymns  of 
praise  to  the  sun ;  nor  yet  the  three  daily  sacri- 
fices and  hymns  of  the  Pythagoreans,  as  men- 
tioned by  Jamblichus,  Tit.  Pythig.  c.  149  ss. 
Cf.  generally,  Zcickler,  1.  c.  p.  329  et  seq.— 
Verse  13  [11].  Then  these  men  assembled 
(rushed  together),  and  found  Daniel  praying 
and  making  supplication  before  his  God.  Here, 
as  in  V.  7  [6J,  Ti""?"]'"!  is  not  a  single  rushing  to- 
gether, but  a  frequent*  hasty  gathering ;  the 
only  difference  is  that  in  that  passage  the  design 
was  to  obtain  the  decree  from  the  king,  while 
here  it  is  to  watch  Daniel  in  order  to  denounce 
him.  According  to  v.  11,  the  open  windows  in 
Daniel's  upper  chamber  seem  to  have  enabled 
them  to  execute  their  plan  of  espionage  with 
success,  either  because  they  saw  him  while 
engaged  in  prayer  (perhaps  from  a  still  more 
elevated  room  in  the  vicinity,  cf.  3  Sam.  xi  3), 
or  because  they  heard  him  from  the  street.  At 
any  rate,  a  repeated  [?]  approach  and  observa- 
tion in  secret  must  be  assumed,  instead  of  a 
single  surprise;  hence  the  question,  "  At  which 
of  his  daily  prayers  was  he  surprised  ? "  is  in- 
appropriate.— Concerning  the  thoroughly  or- 
ganized system  of  espionage  and  denunciation 
in  the  Medo-Persian  kingdom,  of  which  this 
passage  affords  a  characteristic  proof,  see  Max 
Duncker,  GeKChiclite  des  AWrthuiM,  II.  648. 

Verses  13-1.5  [12-14],  The  denunciation. 
Then  they  came  near  and  spake  before 
("  with  ")  the  king,  etc..  cf.  chap.  iii.  8,  and  for 
what  follows,  iii.  24.  —  The  thing  is  true,  ac- 
cording to  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Per- 
sians;  rather,  "the  word  is  firm,  according, 
etc.  8*^1;^  S«:"'2^  does  not  affirm  that  the  de- 
cree was  published,  but  indicates  the  certain 
punishment  of  any  who  might  transgress  it.  — 
Verse  14  [13].  Daniel,  which  is  of  the  children 
of  the  captivity  of  Judah.  Cf.  chap.  v.  13, 
.ind  observe  that  the  accusers  do  not  mention 
the  high  oflfioial  station  of  Daniel  and  his  inti- 
mate official  relations  with  the  king,  but  merely 
refer  to  his  foreign  birth,  (''in  order  that  they 
may  thereby  bring  hus  conduct  under  the  sus- 
picion of  being  a  political  act  of  rebellion  against 
the  royal  authority."  (KeU.)] — Verse  1.5  [14]. 
Then  the  king  ....  ■wdiS  sore  displeased. 
C«a  is  impersonal  in  "'Hibr  3S3,  like  'I']  in 
Gen.  xxi.  12,  and  like  3!*p  below,  in  v.  24  [23]. 
Literally,  therefore,  it  reads,  "Then  the  king, 
when  he  heard  the  word — sorrow  came  on  him" 
(and  similarly  V.  24  [33],  "Then  .  .  .  joy  came 
onhim").f — And  set  his  heart  on  Ltaniel  to 

*  [The  idea  of  frequency  insinted  apoD  by  the  author  aa 
refiidingin  ■i^''3nn  seems  to  have  no  good  su  port.     The 

sense  is  rather  rushedfcmcard,  made  their  way  in  a  body 
and  eagerly,] 

t  ['•  Tne  Icing  is  chagrined  and  ashamed  of  himself  that  he 
allowed  himself  to  be  caught  in  this  snare.  Now  for  the 
Urst  time  he  sees  the  enmity  and  mean  spirit  of  his  officers 
obtaining  from  him  that  decree,  and  hites  hie  lips  in 
ue  that  he  could  have  been  so  beguiled  and  eutrapped. 


deliver  him.  33,  "  heart,"  is  not  found  in  th« 
later  Chaldee,  but  occurs  in  the  Syriac  and 
Arabic.  Compare,  however,  the  phrase  J  -3 
S<3b,  Targ.  Prov.  xxii.  17  —And  he  labored  till 
the  going  dow^n  of  the  sun,  etc.  On  the  form 
"'5??  i»'-  constr.  plur.  of  '*?^^,  or  also  of  thp 
Inf.  3??),  cf.  Hitzig  and  Kranichfeld  on  this 
passage.  Instead  of  "lirips,  "  he  labored ' 
(cf.  ayun^eaiiai,  Luke  xiii.  24),  the  Targums 
have  i'^.Pr'?,  which,  however,  has  a  different 
meaning  from  that  of  "i'lrip!*. 

Verses  16-18  [15-17] .     The  condemnation  and 
execution.     On  v.  16  cf,  supra,  on  v.  9  b. — Verse 

17  [16].  Then  the  king  commanded,  and  they 
brought  Daniel,  and  cast  him  into  the  den  of 
lions;  rather,  "that  they  should  bring  Daniel 
and  cast,"  etc.  The  construction  is  the  same  aa 
in  chap,  v,  29  [but  in  neither  this  nor  that  pas- 
sage is  this  rendering  justified  by  the  force  of 
the  text,  Vr'?'!'!  ....  ^a'l].  According  to 
Oriental  custom,  the  execution  in  this  case,  aa 
in  that  under  Belshazzar,  chap.  v.  39,  and  in 
that  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  chap.  iii.  19  et  seq., 
was  to  follow  immediately  on  the  sentence. 
["  This  does  not.  however,  imply  that  it  was  on 
the  evening  in  which,  at  the  ninth  hour,  he  had 
prayed,  as  Hitzig  afiirms,  in  order  that  he  may 
thereby  make  the  whole  matter  improbable." 
(KeU).  The  season  of  prayer  at  which  Daniel 
was  discovered  would  seem  to  have  been  at 
noon.  This  will  allow  ample  time  for  the  pre- 
paration of  the  edict  the  same  morning,  and  the 
execution  the  same  evening.  The  accusers  were 
evidently  in  hot  haste],  — Thy  God,  whom  thou 
servest  continually,  he  will  deliver  thee ; 
rather,  "may  thy  God  ....  deliver  thee." 
Pilate  may  have  solaced  himself  with  a  simOar 
confession  of  his  own  weakness  and  cowardice, 
when  he  delivered  the  Saviour  into  the  hands  of 
his  mortal  enemies  (Matt,  xxvii.  24  ;  Luke  xxiii. 
25,  etc. ) ;  or  Herod,  when  he  commanded  to 
bring  the  head  of  the  Baptist  (Matt.  xiv.  9). 
Verse  19  [18]  et  seq.  shows  that  the  exclama- 
tion was  by  no  means  intended  to  be  ironical  or 
malicious,  as  those  in  Psa,  xxii,  9  ;  Matt,  xxvii. 
43 ;  but  on  the  other  hand,  Josephus  probably 
attributes  too  favorable  a  disposition  to  Darius, 
when  he  observes :  i/.~ioai;  di  u  Aapnuc  art 
pvatTai  Tu  ^^lov  aiiTov  Kal  oiideii  py  Trd^r/  otivoi' 
ifKo  Tuv  ^fipiui\  £Ke/.£vaev  ai'Tov  €v^i'fiuj(;  t^ipsiv  rd 
avfiSaivnvra  (similarly  also  Jerome  etal.). — Verse 

18  [17].  And  a  stone  was  brought,  and  laid 
upon  the  mouth  of  the  den.  tT^r"',-!^  a  Hebra- 
izing passive  form  of  the  Aphel ;  cf.  on  chap. 
iiL  13.  ri?*',  Hebraizing  passive  partic.  Peal, 
instead  of  n^-'O  (cf.  v.  27  [26]).— It  is  natural 
to  suppose  that  the  stone  was  of  sufficient  size 
to  completely  close  the  mouth  of  the  den,  and 
that  it  was  at  hand  for  that  purpose,  instead  of 


No  doubt  he  heartily  esteemed  Daniel,  and  probably  loved 
him,  and  felt  iherefure  the  bitterest  grief  and  shame  that  he 
should  be  made  unwillingly  the  author  of  his  destniction,'" 
— Cowltx.  He  also  felt  intensely  an,xious  for  his  fate,  .ind 
doubtless  cast  about  in  his  mind  3ome  method  of  extricating 
him,  and  at  the  ,samo  time  o{  exposing  and  punishing  hij 
accuse  rs,l 


1+4 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


MBUming,  with  Hitzig,  that  it  was  necessary  to 
bring  it  from  a  distance.  The  den  itself,  cor- 
responding to  the  sense  of  »ail  (H313),  which  is 
thoroughly  identical  with  that  of  the  Heb.  nis, 
must  not  be  conceived  of  as  a  cistern  or  funnel- 
shaped  pit  (Hitzig) ;  but  rather  as  having  a 
capacity  sufficient  to  hol-.l  several  lions  and  per- 
mit them  to  move  freelj  ibout  (which  involves  i 
no  greater  difficulty  than  that  the  s$;i3  in  the 
Targ  Jer.  xli.  7,  9  should  have  contained  the 
corpses  of  seventy  slain  persons ;  cf.  also  the 
Targ.  Jer.  xxxvii.  16;  Isa.  xvi.  ISy  In  brief,  '■ 
it  may  be  supposed  t<-  have  been  an  actual  lions' 
den,  similar  to  those  connected  with  the  Roman  1 
amphitheatres,  from  which  it  probaby  differed  1 
simply  in  having  a  horizontal  opening  in  the  flat 
or  arched  roof,  through  which  the  ad  bestkis 
dnmnati  were  thrown  to  the  lions,  in  addition  to 
the  door  at  the  side,  by  which  the  beasts  were 
introduced  into  the  den  or  removed  from  it.  Its 
construction  may  therefore  have  been  similar  to 
that  of  the  fiery  furnace,  upon  the  whole  (see 
on  chap.  iii.  6) — an  opinion  which  seems  to  de- 
rive additional  support  from  the  manner  in 
which  Darius  was  enabled  to  converse  with 
Daniel  while  in  the  den,  even  before  the  stone 
was  removed  from  its  opening  (v.  31  et  seq.). 
The  two  lions'  dens  at  Fez,  belonging  to  the 
emperor  of  Morocco,  which  Host  describes  in 
his  Nachriditeii  roa  Fez  unci  Marokko  (pp.  77, 
290)  as  being  large  rectangular  and  uncovered 
pits  in  the  earth  (whose  wide  opening  was  sur- 
rounded by  a  wall  one  and  a  half  ells  in  height), 
were  consequently  constructed  somewhat  differ- 
ently from  that  of  the  Medo-Babylonians  under 
consideration,  but  are  still  interesting  for  com- 
parison with  the  latter. — And  the  king  sealed 
it  TO'ith  his  own  signet,  and  with  the  signet  of 
his  lords.  On  the  custom  of  sealing  cf .  Matt, 
xxvii.  2(5.  The  two- fold  sealing,  with  the  ring 
of  the  king  and  with  that  of  his  grand  officers, 
may  have  been  designed  to  secure  Daniel,  for 
whose  deliverance  the  king  still  hoped  (see  vs. 
17  [16],  21  [20J,  against  any  violent  assault,  and 
also  against  any  attempt  to  liberate  him — 
hence,  to  insure  a  strict  control  of  the  prisoner. 
Cf.  Jerome:  '■'■  Obsignavit  annulo  suo  lapidem, 
quo  OS  Liici  cJaudebatur,  ne  quid  ct/ntra  Danielem 
molkintur  inimici  ....  Obsignat  autem  et  an- 
milo  optimatum  suormn,  ne  quid  suspicionis 
contra  eos  habere  videretur." — That  the  purpose 
might  not  be  changed  concerning  Daniel ; 
rather,  "  that  the  matter,"  etc.;  that  his  situa- 
tion might  not  be  unlawfully  altered.  'IS^  here 
is  not  "  intention,  purpose  "  (v.  Leng.  etc.)""  but 
''affair,  n>atter;"  cf.  the  corresponding  Syriac 
word. 

Verses  19-23  [18-22].  The  kincf  discovers  the 
miraculous  presemation  of  Daniel.  Then  the 
king  went  .  .  .  and  passed  the  night  fasting. 
TTt?  is  properly  a  substantive  with  adverbial  sig- 
nification—  "with  fasting"  —  i.e.,  supperless. 
Luther  renders  it  forcibly,  "and  remained  not 
eating." — Neither  -wer  instruments  of  music 
brought    before    him;    /ather    "concubines." 

•  ["This  thought  (would  fcave)  required  the«W(.  emptiat. 
S^r.^-^^  and  alBO  doep  not  correspond  with  the  application 
If  ■  double  Bcal." — Kelt.] 


IiLstead  of  "food,"  which  is  the  interpretation 
assigned  by  Theodotion,  the  Peshito,  the  Vul- 
gate, Luther,  etc.,  the  rendering  of  inn"!  bj 
"concubines,  women  of  the  harem,"  is  suffi- 
ciently supported  by  closely  related  terms  in  the 
Arabic ;  and  the  verb  b^^C  in  connection  with 
the  prep.  D"!'^.  admits  of  no  other  interpreta- 
tion. The  bringing  in  of  inanimate  object* 
would  have  been  expressed  by  '^ri'^O  ;  cf.  chap. 
V.  2  with  ii.  24.  2.j  ;  iv.  3 ;  v.  13,  15.— And  his 
sleep  went  from  him ;  forsook  him ;  cf .  on  chap, 
ii.  1. — Verse  20  [19] .  Then  the  king  arose  very- 
early  in  the  morning  ;  ' '  with  the  dawn,  when 
it  became  light."  Sl.S-icip,  "the  dawn"  (  = 
"in'iJ,  Targ.  Jon.  on  Isa.  Iviii.  8).  The  hypo- 
thetical rendering  of  the  imperf.  S'lp^,  for  which 
Kranichfeld  contends,  is  unnecessary.  ["The 
future  or  imperfect  is  used  instead  of  the  per- 
fect to  place  this  clause  in  relation  to  the  follow- 
ing, meaning :  the  king,  as  soon  as  he  arose  at 
■morning  dawn,  went  hastily  by  the  early  light" 
(Keil).]  The  Septuagint  is  [substantially]  cor- 
rect :  up^piat  TTpui ;  also  Theodotion,  the  Pesh- 
ito, etc. — ''l^???!  "with  the  twilight,  with  the 
dawn  or  break  of  day  "  ["serves  for  a  mere  de- 
termination of  the  S"lB";S"i'a,  at  the  mm-ning 
dawn,  namely,  as  soon  as  the  first  rays  of  the 
rising  sun  appeared "  (Keil)]  ;  cf.  "i'i*<3.  Job 
xxiv.  14. — And  went  in  haste.  n,~3r~3,  as  in 
chap.  ii.  35,  =  pc~a  a^uvdiji: ;  cf.  Luke  i.  39.  — 
Verse  21  [20].  And  ....  cried  with  a  lamen- 
table voice  unto  Daniel.  -■'V"  =  "'?  ;  cf.  Isa. 
liv.  6  with  Prov.  xxxi.  6. — O  Daniel,  servant  of 
the  living  God.  Darius  was  able  to  designate 
the  God  of  Daniel  as  the  living  God  (cf.  v.  27) 
thus  early,  before  his  observation  had  convinced 
him  of  the  prophet's  safety,  for  the  simple 
reason  that  during  the  intercourse  consequent 
on  their  intimate  relation,  Daniel  had  instructed 
him  concerning  the  nature  and  power  of  his  God 
as  the  God  of  all  gods,  and  also  because  the 
pangs  of  conscience  endured  by  him  during  the 
night  that  had  just  elapsed,  had  produced  a  pro 
found  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  prophet's 
testimony  to  Jehovah. *— Verse  23  [22J.  My 
God  hath  sent  his  angel,  and  hath  shut  the 
Uons'  mouths.  Cf.  v.  28  [27]  ;  Acts  xii.  7.  The 
summary  conciseness  of  the  statement  forbids 
any  conclusion  as  to  whether  Daniel  had  seen 
the  angel  who  wrought  his  miraculous  deliver- 
ance, as  an  objective  fact,  or  whether  he  merely 
argued  from  the  effect  to  the  underlying  invisi- 
ble cause  (cf.  Psa.  xxxiv.  8;  xci.  11  et  seq.  ; 
Matt.  viii.  9,  etc. ).  On  the  expression,  ' '  to  shut 
the  lions'  mouths,"  cf.  2  Tim.  iv.  17  ;  Heb.  xi. 
33. — And  also  before  thee,  O  king,  have  I  done 
no  hurt.  "Before  thee,"  '^l^tt-p,  i.e.,  "in 
thine  eyes,  according  to  thy  judgment "  —  a 
loosely  connected  supplemental  proof  of  what  he 
has  just  asserted,  viz.,  that  he  is  innocent.     In 


*  ["  The  pretlicate  tfte  living  God  isoccasioned  by  the  prc?- 
servation  of  life  which  the  kinp  regarded  as  possible,  and  pri> 
bably  was  made  Itnown  tu  the  king  in  previous  conversation! 
with  Daniel;  cf.  Psa.  xlii.  3;  lixxiv.  3;  1  Sam.  xviL  Sti, 
ete."-  ^tU.\ 


CHAP.  VI.  1-29. 


lU 


modem  speeoli  the  connection  might  have  been. 
"even  as  I  was  likewise  found  innocent  by  thee  " 
(which  was  apparent  to  him  from  the  king's 
anxious  inquiries  concerning  his  welfare).  * 

Verses  24,  25  [23,  24].  T/te  ddicerance  of 
Daniel  and  the puKis/imint  nf  /lis  enemies.  Then 
was  the  king  exceeding  glad  (of.  on  v.  lo)  for 
him,f  and  commanded  that  they  should  take 
Daniel  up  out  of  the  dea4  ~P9:'T')  ^^^  inf 
Aphel  of  the  root  P-0,  compensates  for  the 
doubling  by  ;,  similarly  to  b^rC  in  v.   19   [18J 

(cf.  ii.  25).  Cf.  P^Sn,  chap.  iii.  22.— Verse  25 
[34J.  And  the  king  commanded,  and  they 
brought  those  men;  rather,  "that  those  men 
should  be  brought. "  The  same  construction  as 
inv.  17  [1*5]. § — "Those  men"  are  the  same  who 
are  mentioned  in  vs.  6  [5]  and  7  [OJ,  viz.  :  the 
grand  officers  who  were  present  in  Babylon 
itself,  and  who  had  taken  part  in  traducing 
Daniel.  A  number  of  them  may  have  been  in 
the  king's  train,  when  he  commanded  that  the 
seals  should  be  broken  and  the  stone  removed  (v. 
24  [23J),  without  venturing  to  protest,  in  the 
presence  of  the  angry  monarch,  against  the  vio- 
lation of  the  seal  which  belonged  in  part  to  them. 
The  others  were  brought  from  their  houses  by 
the  king's  command.  There  is  consequently 
nothing  in  the  passage  that  involves  a  ditficul;y 
or  that  contradicts  V.  18  [17]  (ag.ainst  Hitzig). — 
WriiCh  had  accused  Daniel  Literally,  "who 
had  devoured  Daniel's  flesh  ; "  cf .  on  chap.  ui. 
b. — And  they  cast  .  .  .  into  the  den  of  lions, 
them  their  children,  and  their  wrJves.  Upon 
this  point  even  Hitzig  is  compelled  to  remark ; 
*'  To  execute  the  familes  of  criminals  together 
with  themselves  was  eminently  the  Persian  cus- 
tom (Herod.,  III.  119;  Ammian.  Marcel.,  xxiii. 
G,  81) ;  Justin,  in  such  an  instance,  makes  espe- 
cial relerence  to  the  wives  and  chililren  (X.  2) ; 
cf.  further,  Justin,  XXI.  4;  Josh.  vii.  24,  25." 
On  the  authority  of  the  statements  quoted  from 
Herodotus  and  Justin  (and  also  inlluenced  by 
what  Curtius,  VI.  11.  states  with  reference  to 
the  custom  among  the  Macedonians),  Hitzig  con- 
tends that  such  fearfully  bloody  justice — whose 
barbarous  severity  our  prophet  seems  to  allude 
to  when  he  mentions  the  children  before  the 
wives — was  only  inflicted  on  conspirators  against 
the  king.  But  Ammian,  (1.  c.)  states  no  such 
limitation ;  and  the  maUcious  plot  of  these 
magnates  against  one  of  the  chief  officials  of  the 
kingdom,  as  well  as  intimate  counsellor  of  the 


•  ["  Daniel  casts  no  severe  reproach  upon  the  king.  In- 
deed the  orifrinal  rather  expresses  a  eenial  and  kindly  feel- 
ing ;  Daniel  *  talked  with  the  king.'  With  beautiful  modesty 
he  ascr.bes  his  deliverance  to  God's  own  hand  alone  through 
his  angel,  and  very  properly  asserts  his  innocence  of  any 
wrong  in  this  matter.— We  may  suppose  Daniel  to  have  had 
a  sweet  sense  of  the  presence  of  God  by  his  angel  while 
spending  the  night  in  the  den  with  these  hungry  lions." — 
Voicleh.] 

t  LTT^j-?  does  not  refer  to  Daniel,  but  to  the  king  him- 

eelf.    It  denotes  the  reflexive  sense  of  35eD,  which  is  here 

used  impersonally  :  gladness  came  over  him.j 

t  l**By  this,  however,  we  are  not  to  undei-stand  a  being 
drawn  up  by  ropes  through  the  opening  of  the  den  from 
above.  The  bHiigiiig  out  was  by  the  opened  passage  in  the 
hide  of  the  den.  for  which  purpose  the  stone  with  the  seals 
was  removed." — Keii.\ 

\  [But  the  rendering  proposed  by  tile  author  lA  equally 
Iniidmissible  here  '  \ 

10 


king,  was  almost  equivalent  to  a  conspirac> 
directed  against  the  royal  person. — And  the 
lions  had  the  mastery  of  ihem  (or  "fell  upon 
them  ")  .  .  .  or  ever  they  came  at  the  bottom 
of  the  den.  LiteraUj-.  "and  not  came  they  .  . 
.  .  wnfS  Mai."  i.f.,  when  the  lions  already  seized 
them.  On  the  incident,  cf .  chap.  iii.  22  ;  con- 
cerning the  form  '-P'r,  see  chap.  ii.  29. 

Verses  26-28  [25-27] .  The  royal  prodnmation 
consequent  on  the  mirnenlmis  deliverance  oj 
Daniel.  Then  king  Darius  wrote  (commanded 
to  write)  unto  all  people,  nations,  and  lan- 
guages, etc.  ;  i.e.,  to  all  the  subjects  of  hia 
realm,  which  was  a  world-kingdom  like  that  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  chap.  iii.  31. — Verse  27  [26].  I 
make  a  decree.  Cf .  iii.  29 ;  iv.  3,  where  ths 
shorter  "'i'p  occurs  instead  of  ^^"Ip"!":,  which 
is  foimd  in  this  place.  ^That .  .  .  men  tremble 
and  fear  before  the  God  of  Daniel.  Cf.  chap. 
V.  19. — The  theocratic  phi.aseology  of  the  royal 
edict  admits  of  the  same  explanation  as  do  the 
similar  proclamations  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  chap, 
ii.  47  ;  iii.  28  et  seq.  ;  iii.  31  et  seq.  ;  iv.  31  et  seq. 
It  results  in  part  from  the  extended  intercourse  of 
the  king  with  Daniel,  the  representative  of  the 
theocratic  faith  of  revelation  ;  and  in  part  from 
the  profound  influence  of  the  experience  of  the  im- 
mediate past. — And  his  kingdom  (is  one)  which 
shall  not  be  destroyed ;  a  forcible  ellipsis,  simi- 
lar, for  instance,  to  that  in  chap.  vii.  14  ;  cf. 
also  chap.  ii.  44;  and  on  the  thought,  iii.  33; 
iv.  31. — And  his  dominion  (shall  be  even)  unto 
the  end;  i.e.,  "to  the  end  of  all  earthly  king- 
doms, to  the  end  of  the  world  "  (the  nuv7t'/.eia 
rnr  cii'jrct;),  which  coincides  with  the  erection  of 
the  completed  kingdom  of  Messiah  or  God  ;  cf, 
vii.  14,  20  et  seq.— Verse  28  [27].  He  deUver- 
eth  and  rescuetn ;  rather,  "He  is  a  saviour  and 
deliverer."  Cf.  chap.  iii.  29  6.,  and  for  what 
follows  cf.  iii.  32  ;  iv.  32. — From  the  power  of 
the  lions  :  literally,  "oit  of  the  hand  of  the 
Uons ;  "  cf.  Psa.  xxii.  21,  "  out  of  the  hand  of 
the  dogs." 

Verse  29  [28].  I'he  epilogue.  So  this  Daniel 
prospered  in  the  reign  of  Darius.  "  This 
Daniel,"  as  in  v.  4  ^3]. — f^-?~,  "  found  prosper- 
ity, prospered  ;"  similar  to  cnap.  ii'l.  30.  Ewald'a 
reading,  T?2n,  which  is  designed  to  be  equiva- 
lent to,  "  he  was  reinstated  in  his  office  "  (?),  is 
unnecessary. — On  the  subject  cf.  chap.  ii.  48.— 
And  (also)  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  the  Persian. 
This  complementary  closing  sentence,  like  that 
in  chap.  i.  21,  appears  to  have  been  added  a  con 
siderable  time  after  the  preceding  facts  were 
recorded,  for  the  purpose  of  closing  the  histori- 
cal part  of  the  book  as  a  whole.  But  the  objec- 
tion that  it  is  clearly  a  ' '  bald  and  labored 
gloss  in  its  appearance"  (Kranichf.),  is  not 
therefore  justified.  The  reign  of  Cyrus  is  mere- 
ly mentioned,  as  having  been  reached  by  Daniel, 
for  the  same  reason  that  dictated  chap.  i.  21. 

ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAIi  PRINCIPLES  REL.\TED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALV.iTION,  APOLO- 
GETICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETICAL  SUG- 
GESTIONS. 

1.  The  similarity  of  the  facts  recorded  in  tbii 
section  to  those  of  the  third  chapter  is  certainJj 


110 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


evident  and  vmdeniable ;  but  these  analogies  do 
not  warrent  the  disregarding  of  the  important 
differences  between  the  incidents  of  the  two  sec- 
tions. These  differences,  on  the  one  hand, 
affect  the  disposition  and  the  modes  of  action  of 
the  persons  engaged  in  the  various  transactions, 
in  which  respect  the  king  Darius  especially  ob- 
serves from  the  beginning  a  more  cordial  bear- 
ing toward  the  worshipper  of  Jehovah  than  does 
Nebuchadnezzar ;  and,  on  the  other,  they  relate 
to  the  miracle  which  forms  the  end  and  climax 
of  the  entire  event.  The  deliverance  of  Daniel 
from  the  lions'  den  was  a  miracle  differing  mate- 
rially in  character  from  that  of  the  deliverance 
of  the  three  Hebrews  from  the  fiery  furnace  ; 
while  the  latter,  as  was  intimated  on  chap.  iii. 
23,  would  admit  of  a  natural  explanation.  To 
some  extent  at  least,  this  is  absolutely  impossi- 
ble with  the  event  recorded  in  this  chapter,  as 
may  be  seen  more  particularly  from  the  fact, 
noticed  in  v.  25  [24]  b,  that  the  same  lions  who 
spared  Daniel  during  an  entire  night  immedi- 
ately seized  on  his  .accusers  with  a  ravenous  vora- 
city in  order  to  rend  them.  By  this  contrast 
between  the  subjection  of  the  beasts  to  the  pro- 
phet, and  the  outburst  of  their  savage  nature 
towards  the  guilty  princes — a  contrast  which 
evidently  constitutes  the  fundamental  charac- 
teristic of  the  incident  before  us — this  miracle 
takes  its  position  amoug  that  series  of  marvel- 
lous events  in  Old  and  New  Testament  history 
in  which  the  life  and  work  of  isolated  distin- 
guished messengers  of  revelation  appear,  by  vir- 
tue of  Divine  grace,  to  have  restored  the  para- 
disaical dominion  of  man  over  nauare,  so  that 
the  beasts  of  the  desert  yield  him  a  ready  obe- 
dience as  their  rightful  lord.  We  class  here, 
prior  to  the  time  of  Daniel,  the  ravens  of  Elijah 
(1  Kings  xvii.  4)  and  the  bears  of  Elisha  (2  Kings 
iL  24) ;  and  in  N.  T.  times,  the  sojourning  of 
the  Saviour  with  the  beasts  of  the  desert,  imme- 
diately subsequent  to  his  temptation  (Mark  i.  13), 
Paul's  escape  from  injury  by  the  viper  on  the 
island  of  Malta  (Acts  xxviii.  5  ;  cf.  Mark  xvi. 
18),  and  perhaps  several  incidents  of  a  similar 
character  in  the  history  of  the  earliest  monkish 
saints  and  missionaries  of  the  Church  down  to 
the  times  of  Columban  and  Gallus,  so  far  as  any 
faith  may  be  placed  on  the  statements  in  the 
generally  fancifully  distorted  biographies  of 
these  saints  which  relate  to  their  friendly  inter- 
course with  wild  beasts  (cf.  Montalembert,  Les 
Moines  (F Occident  depais  St.  Benoit  jusqu'd  St. 
Bernard,  vol.  II.  ;  and  for  a  criticism  of  the 
often  excessively  credulous  judgment  of  this 
author  with  reference  to  such  miracles,  see  the 
reyiew  of  his  work  in  the  Jahrbiicher  filr  deutsche 
Thef}logie,  1862,  No.  2). — It  is,  however,  pre- 
cisely because  the  miraculous  incident  of  this 
section  belongs  to  the  category  of  such  facts, 
that  it  must  rank  as  the  greatest  wonder  record- 
ed in  the  historical  part  of  the  book,  as  the 
climax  in  the  series  of  mighty  works  by  which 
God  glorified  Himself  in  His  servants  in  the 
metropolis  of  the  Chaldsean  empire,  and  which, 
forming  a  gradation  of  miracles  in  certain  as- 
pects, ami  presenting  a  constantly-increasing 
manifestation  of  the  supernatural  element  in 
them,  from  chap.  i.  l.'S  to  the  close  of  this  chap- 
ter, excludes,  with  steadily-increasing  emphasis, 
the  possibility  of  tracing  back  the  events  to 
natural  caufles  (of.  especially  on  chap.  v.  5). 


2.  So  far  as  the  general  situation  is  similar  to 
that  described  in  chap,  iii,,  it  accords  well  with 
the  conditions  of  the  captivity,  "in  which  the 
aim  was  not,  as  afterwards  under  Antiochua 
Epiphanes,  to  extirpate  the  Jewish  worship,  but 
where  we  find  merely  certain  very  natural  and 
intelligible  displays  of  grudging  selfishness  and 
envy  on  the  part  of  individual  native  officials,  as 
against  a  captive  foreigner  who  was  preferred 
above  them  in  official  stations ;  while  the  gen 
eral  condition  of  the  captives  was  very  tolerable, 
as  a  natural  result  of  the  lax  administration  ol 
government  which  was  usual  an.oiig  Oriental 
conquerors  "  (Kranichfeld).  The  assertion  of  the 
modem  "tendency-critics"  (Hitzig,  p.  80  et 
seq.  ;  Bleek,  p.  604,  etc.),  that  the  edict  of 
Darius  which  prohibited  the  rendering  of  Dirine 
honors  during  one  month  to  any  but  the  king 
(v.  8  [7J)  was  invented  for  the  purpose  of  exag- 
gerating or  caricaturing  the  proclamation  of 
Autiochus  Epiphanes,  which  prohibited  the  Jews 
from  observing  the  Divine  law  and  their  worship 
of  Jehovah  (1  Mace.  i.  41 ;  2  Mace.  vi.  1-9),  in 
order  to  incite  them  to  steadfast  endurance  and 
to  patient  trust  in  God, — this  assertion  is  decid- 
edly nugatory,  since  the  raging  fanaticism  of 
the  Syrian  king,  which  aimed  at  the  total  de- 
struction of  the  Jewish  worship  and  nationality, 
had  nothing  in  common  with  the  far  milder  dis- 
position of  Darius,  and  since  the  latter  was 
merely  concerned  to  bring  about  a  temporary 
suspension  of  the  religious  observances  in  vogue, 
rather  than  to  definitely  extirpate  the  current 
systems  of  religion.  Nor  would  it  have  been 
possible  for  the  pious  Jews  of  the  Macoabaean 
period  to  recognize  an  edict,  which  amounted 
directly  to  the  deifying  of  the  king,  as  a  proto 
type  of  the  m.nnifesto  of  the  Syrian  king,  which 
differed  materially  from  it,  in  respect  both  to  its 
language  and  its  character.  For  this  reason  Von 
Lengerke,  more  cautious  than  his  compeers,  re- 
jects the  assumption  that  the  edict  of  v.  8  [7] 
was  a  conventional  fiction  framed  on  the  model 
of  that  mentioned  in  the  Maccabsean  books,  as 
being  too  artificial  and  unsupported  a  hypothe- 
sis, and  contents  himself  with  observing  that 
"the  proclamation  of  Darius  on  the  religious 
question  corresponds  in  general  to  that  persecut- 
ing spirit  which  produced  the  measures  of  Anti- 
ochus. "  But  it  will  be  seen  that  even  this  is  not 
correct,  since  the  deportment  of  Darius  towards 
Daniel,  manifesting  in  every  respect  a  mild, 
friendly,  and  benevolent  spirit  (vs.  14,  15  et 
seq.  ;  21  et  seq.),  presents  the  sharpest  contrast 
to  the  senseless  rage  and  blood-thirsty  spirit  of 
persecution  displayed  by  the  intolerant  Syrian 
tyrant ;  and,  moreover,  since  no  reason  ^vhat- 
ever  can  be  discovered  that  could  induce  the 
alleged  Maccabsean-tendency  writer  to  invent  so 
weak,  and  in  all  respects  so  inappropriate,  a 
counterfeit  of  Autiochus  at  the  Inst,  after  hav- 
ing furnished  in  Nebuchadnezzar  and  BeKshazzar 
far  more  suitable  and  tangible  types  of  that 
despot.  Nor  does  it  appear  why  he  should 
desire  to  conceal  the  person  of  Antiochus  behind 
that  of  a  jealous  and  scheming  official  under  the 
Median  king  (vs.  4,  5  et  seq.). — How  much  more 
simple  and  intelligible,  in  comparison  with  such 
hypercritical  assumptions,  does  the  narrative 
appear  when  its  characteristic  peculiarities  are 
regarded  as  historical  facts,  such  as  were  natu- 
rally to  be  expected  in  the  scenes  of  a  politioo 


CHAP.  VII.  1-28. 


147 


religious  drama  that  transpired  on  the  soil  of 
the  newly-fouuded  Medo-Persian  world-king- 
dom !  The  120  satrapies  Instead  of  the  former 
division  of  the  kingdom  into  differently  consti- 
tuted provinces  ( cf .  vi.  2  with  iii .  2) ;  the  exceed- 
ingly independent  course  of  the  royal  counsel- 
lors and  officers,  without  whose  consent  no  edict 
could  be  promulgated  nor  the  royal  seal  affixed 
(vs.  H  [7],  18  [17J);  the  temporary  deifying  of 
the  king  as  the  son  and  image  of  the  supreme 
God  (V.  8  et  seq. ),  so  suq>risingly  in  harmony 
with  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  Old-Per- 
sian state  religion  ;  the  cruel  procedure  connected 
with  the  punishment  of  the  offenders  (v.  25  [34J) 
which  bears,  in  an  equal  degree,  the  stamp  of 
specifically  Persian  legal  usage  ;  and  finally,  the 
repeated  reference  to  the  "  law  of  the  Medes  and 
Persians,"  as  the  original  source  and  inviolable 
authority  for  the  measures  proposed  and  put  in 
force — all  these  point,  with  all  possible  force 
and  internal  congruity,  to  a  well-defined  his- 
torical condition  with  which  the  writer  was 
familiarly  acquainted,  an  actual  condition  which 
was  distinguished  from  the  state  existing  in 
the  Chaldajo-Babylonian  kingdom  in  a  man- 
ner that  corresponds  fully  with  numerous 
extra-biblical  testimonies,  and  which  indicates 
that  the  experience  and  personal  observation  of 
the  author  formed  the  only  source  of  his  descrip- 
tions. Cf.  the  observations  made  above  on  the 
several  passages. 

3.  The  homUetical  treatment  of  this  section 
will  vary,  according  as  the  conduct  and  fate  of 
Daniel,  the  man  of  God,  receive  attention,  or  as 
those  of  the  other  agents,  viz.  :  of  the  good- 
natured  but  weak  king  and  of  the  jealous  accus- 
ers, are  prominently  considered.  In  the  former 
case,  the  theme  for  the  treatment  of  the  subject 
as  a  whole  might  be  :  "  We  should  obey  God, 
rather  than  men  "  (cf.  v.  5  with  v.  11  et  seq. ) ; 
or,  "  Fidelity  to  God  is  a  more  precious  virtue, 
and  secures  a  more  certain  and  precious  reward, 
than  fidelity  to  human  authority;  "  or,  "  It  is 
better  to  be  the  friend  of  God,  even  if  the  foe 
of  the  whole  world. "  In  the  latter  case  :  "Who- 
so digs  a  pit  for  others,  shall  fall  into  it  him- 
self ;  "  or,  ''  God  knows  how  to  use  the  plans  by 
which  men  seek  to  destroy  his  faithful  servants, 
for  their  deliverance  and  honor;"  or  "  God  has 
converted  many  a  ruler,  from  being  a  persecutor 
of  His  church  into  its  forwarder  and  zealous 
protector !  " 

In  coonectiou  with  the  former  class  of  medi- 


tations, cf.  the  following  extracts  from  oldei 
practical  expositors:  Jerome  (on  vs.  11.  12) 
"  Daniel,  regusjussa  conteinncim  et  in  Deohabem 
Jiducuim,  non  orat  in  humili  loco,  scd  in  eicelsD, 
et  feiieMran  aperit  contra  Jerusalem,  iibi  erat 
vino  pads.  Orat  avtem  secundum  prcecej^tum 
Dei  dictague  Seilonwnis,  qnicontra  templum  ornn- 
dum  esse  admonuit."  Melancthon  (on  v.  I'J  et 
seq.);  "  Periculum  Danielis  jiinr/it  robur  et  fio- 
lentiam  /wstium  Christi.  Sicut  Daniel  iinbecillis 
objicitur  leonibus,  sic  tota  Ecclesia  luibct  hvstet 
valtdissimos,  diabolum,  reges,  potentes,  superbos, 
prifstantes  auetoritnte  et  opihm  in  mundo.  Lib- 
eratio  Danielis  est  testimonium,  quod  Dtus  adsit 
Sanctis  et  aervet  eos  suojudicio,  alias  corpore,  alias 
spiritu."  Starke  (on  v.  29  [28J):  "Whosoever 
does  not  permit  himself  to  be  driven  by  persecu- 
tion and  danger,  either  from  the  upright  fear  of 
God,  nor.  on  the  other  hand,  from  his  lawful 
obedience  to  earthly  authorities,  shall  hud  at 
la.st  that  honor  and  glory  follow  upon  fidelity  "  (1 
Sam   xxiv.  11,  21). 

With  the  second  class  of  themes,  cf. :  Melanc- 
thon (on  V.  5  [4|) :  '■  'J'ales  hahet  diabolus  minis- 
tru.1,  (pii cnjrtntis  occasionibus  regum  animos  astute 
a  teritate  avertunt,  ubi  sumina  officii  et  virtutis 
specie  insidicB  struuntur.  Ita  hie  .  .  .  bonus 
senex  .  .  .  non  videt  quantum  admittat  sceleris, 
quod  in  edicts  etiam  Dei  intocatio  prohibetur. 
Monet  igitur  hoc  exemplum,  vt  cauti  sint  pirinci- 
pes  in  obsertandis  tulibus  insidiis,  nc  pnesertim 
in  leyibus  et  edictis  c^ndendis."  Id.  (on  v.  1.)  et 
seq.) :  "'  Quamquam igitur peccarit Darius,  tamen 
injirmitate  lapsus  est  et  contra  furorem  accusa- 
torum  s-ustentat  se  quadam  scintilla  fidei,  q\K^ 
ostendit  Tion  ipsum.  sed  pi'incipes  esse  supjiUeii 
auctores,  etiamsi  i/isi  non  satis  furtitor  eos  repres- 
serat  ....  'J'ales  infirnios  sublecat  Deus,  vt  hie 
apparet.  Sequitur  enini  statiui  acerbissima  pieiii- 
tentia  regis,  ac  deinde  tantum  fidei  robur,  tunta 
animi  miignitudo,  ut  puniot  etiam  atcusatores." 
Geier  (on  v.  21  [20]):  "Hoc  sensu  Darium  ex 
animi  sui  sententia  adeoque  ex  vera  fide  compel- 
lasse  Danielis  Deum,  vero»imile  non  est;  sic 
nainque  omnia  Persarum  Medorumque  improbas- 
set  et  abnegasset  numina  ....  immo  non  vocat 
Deum  suum,  sed  Danielis,  neque  ait  se  ipsun 
colere,  sed:  quern  tucolis."  Joh.  Gerhard  (  Weim. 
Bib.,  on  V.  24  et  seq  ) :  "  God  is  able  to  promote 
and  extend  the  true  faith  by  means  of  the  very 
persecutions  and  other  methods  by  which  ita 
enemies  seek  to  destroy  it. " 


SECOND  (PROPHETIC)  DIVISION. 

Chap.  VII. -XII. 

1.   TJie  vision  of  the  four  world-kingdoms  and  of  the  Messianic  kingdom, 

VII. 

In  the  first  year  of  Belsliazzar  king  of  Babylon,  Daniel  had  [saw]  a  dream, 
and  visions  of  his  head  upon  liis  bed  :  tiien  he  wrote  the  dream,  anduAii  the  sum 
of  the  matters.' 

Daniel  spake  ''  and  said,  I  saw  '  in  my  vision  by  °  night,  and,  behold,  the  four 
winds  of  tile  heaven  [heavei\sj  strove  upon  [were  riishiai/  to]  the  great  sea.  Aud 
four  great  beasts  came  up  from  the  sea,  diverse  one  from  another  ° 


V4!>  THE  PROPHET  DAXIEL. 


4  The  first  was  like  a  lion,  and  had  eajjle's  wings :  I  beheld  till '  the  wings  there 
of  were  plucked,  and  it  was  lifted  w^7  troiu  the  earth,  and  made  [to]  stand  upon 

5  the  teet  as  a  man,  and  a  man's  heart  was  given  to  it.  And,  behold,  another  beast, 
a  second,  like  to  a  bear,  and  it  raised  '  tqj  itself  [was  made  to  stand]  on  one  side,' 
and  it  had  three  ribs  in  the  mouth  of  it  between   the  teeth  of  it :  and  they  said 

C  thus  unto  it.  Arise,  devour  much  flesh.  After  this  I  beheld,'  and  lo,  another, 
like  a  leopard,  which  [and  it]  had  upon  the  back  of  it  foui'  wings  of  a  fowl  [bird]  : 

7  the  beast  had  also  four  heads  ;  and  dominion  icas  given  to  it.  After  this  I  saw  * 
in  the  night  visions,  and,  beliold,  a  fourth  beast,  dreadful  and  terrible,  and  strong 
exceedingly  ;  and  it  had  great  iron  teeth:  '"  it  devoured  and  brake  in  pieces,  and 
stamped  the  residue  with  the  feet  of  it :  and  it  was  diverse  from  all  the  beasts 

8  that  were  before  it;  and  it  had  ten  horns.  I  considered  "  the  hoi'ns,  and,  behold, 
there  came  up  among  them  another  little  horn,  before  whom  [and  from  before  it] 
there  were  three  of"'  the  first  horns  plucked  up  by  the  roots  [were  extirpated]  : 
and,  behold,  in  this  horn  were  eyes  like  the  eyes  of  man,  and  a  mouth  speaking 
great  things. 

9  I  beheld  till '  the  thrones  were  cast  [set]  down,  and  the  Ancient  of  days  did 
sit,  whose  [his]  garment  was  white  as  snow,  and  the  hair  of  his  head  like  the  '" 
pure  wool:  his  throne  vms  like  the'''  fiery  flame  [flames  of  fire],a«rf  his  wheels  as 

10  burning  fire.  A  fiery  stream  [stream  of  fire]  issued  [flowed]  and  came  forth  from 
before  him  :  thousand  thousands  ministered  unto  him,"  and  ten  thousand  times 
ten  thousand  stood '*  before  him:  the  judgment  was  set  [did  sit],  and  tlie  books 

1 1  were  opened.  I  beheld  '  then,  because  of  the  voice  of  the  great  words  which 
the  horn  spake  \yaas  speaking]  ;  I  beheld,  even  till'  the  beast  was  slain,  and  his 

12  [its]  body  destroyed,  and  given  to  the  burning  flame.  As  concerning  [And] 
tlie  rest  of  the  beasts,  they  had  their  dominion  taken  away  : '"  yet  their  lives  were 
prolonged  for  "  a  season  and  time. 

13  I  saw'  in  the  night  visions,  and,  behold,  one  like  the  Son  of  man  came  [was 
coming]  with  the  clouds  of  heaven   [the  heavens],  and   came  to  [reached]  the 

14  Ancient  of  days,  and  they  brought  him  near  before  him.  And  there  was  given 
him  [to  him  loas  given]  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that  all  people, 
nations,  and  languages,"  should  serve  "  him  :  his  dominion  is  an  everlasting 
dominion,  which  shall  not  pass  away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be 
destroyed. 

15  I  Daniel  was  grieved  in  my  spirit  [my  spirit  was  grieved]  in  the  midst  of  my 

1 6  body  \its  sheath],  and  the  visions  of  my  head  troubled  "  me.  I  came  near  unto  "' 
one"'  of  them  that  stood  hy,  and  asked  him"  the  truth  of"  all  this.     So  [And] 

17  he  told  me,  and  made^'  me  know  the  interpretation  of  the  things."'     These  great 
IS  beasts,  which  are"'  four,  are  four  kings,  which  shall  arise  out  of  the  earth.     But 

[And]  the  saints  of  the  Most  High  "  sliall  take  [receive]  the  kingdom,  and  pos- 
sess the  kingdom  for  ever,  even  for  ever  and  ever. 

19  Then  I  would  knoio  [wished]  the  truth  of'  the  fourth  beast,  wliich  was  diverse 
from  all  the  others  [of  them],  exceeding  dreadful,  whose  [its]  teeth  were  of 'won, 
and  his  [its]   nails  of  bi-ass  ;  which  devoured,  brake   [breaking]   in  pieces,  and 

20  stamped  the  residue  with  his  [its]  feet;  and  of"  the  ten  horns  that  were  in  his 
[its]  head,  and  of  the  other  which  came  up,  and  before  whom  [from  before  it] 
three  lell ;  even  [and]  of  that  horn  that  [and  it]  had  eyes,  and  a  mouth  that 
spake  [speaking]  very  great  things,  whose  [and  its]  look  was  more  stout  than  hia 

21  [its]  fellows.     I  beheld,*  and  the  same  [that]  horn  made  war  with  the  saints,  and 

22  prevailed  '  against  them  ;  until  the  Ancient  of  days  came,  and  [the]  judgment  was 
given  to  the  saints  of  the  3Iost  High  ; "'  and  the  time  came  [arrived]  that  [,  and] 
the  saints  possessed  the  kingdom. 

23  Thus  he  said,  The  fourth  beast  shall  be  tlie  fourth  kingdom"  ujion  [the]  earth, 
which  shall  be  diverse  Irom  all  [the]   kingdoms,  and  shall  devour  the  whole 

S4  earth,  and  r.hall  tread  it  down,  and  break  it  in  pieces.  And  the  ten  horns  out  of 
this"  kingdom  are  ten  kings  that  shall  arise:  and  another  shall  rise  [arise]  aftei 
them  ;  and  he  shall  be  diverse  from  tlie  first,  and  he  shall  subdue  [abase]  three 

fS  kings.  And  he  s^hall  speak  great  words  against  the  3Iost  High,  and  shall  wear 
out  [artli(.<tj  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,"  and  think  to  change  times  and  laws 


CHAP    VII.  1-28. 


149 


[law] :  and  they  shall  be  given  into  his  hand,  until  a  time  and  times  and  the 
2G  dividing  of  [half  a]  time.  But  [And]  tlie  judgment  shall  [did]  sit,  and  they 
27   shall  t'.ike  away  his  dominion,    o  consume  and  to  destroy  it  unto  the  end.     And 

the  kingdom  and  [the]  dominion,  and  the  greatness  of  the  kingdom  under  the 

whole  heaven  [heavens],  shall  be  given  to  the  people  of  tfi^  saints  of  the  Most  High," 

whose  [his]  kingdom  is  an  everlasting  kingdom,  and  all  [the]  dominions  shall 

serve  and  obey  him. 
28       Hitherto  is  the  end  of  the  matter."     As  for  me  "  Daniel,  my  cogitations 

[thoughts]  much  troubled  "  me,  and  my  countenance  "  changed  in  "  me ;  but 

[and]  I  kept  the  matter '"  in  my  heart. 
8 

GRAMMATICAL   AXD    LEXICAL   NOTES. 

[*  To. — '  Or,  chief  of  the  words. — ^  Aiisicered. — *  Was  seeing. — *  With  the. — "  Changed  this  from  that. — '  Was  seeing 
Hit  that. — *  r  ?3^pri  is  evidently  used  here  to  correspond  with  the  description  of  the  preceding  verse,  and  hence  the  pointing 
n  to  is  preferred,  as  in  the  margin. — "  *n~"1  wCi»  to  one  side,  sidewise,  i.e.,  partialti/^  prob.  on  the  fore  or  hind  feel 

only ;  in  a  cronching  or  half-risen  posture ;  thus  contrasted  with  the  erect  attitude  of  the  Uon  preceding  on  both  feet  ^y 

^'^^m — '"  The  position  of  the  terms  is  emphatic,  teeth  of  iron  vere  to  it,  ffreatonee >'  Was  occupying  my  attention  with. — 

-'■'  Out  of,  or  among, — 13  The  definite  article  is  here  injurious  to  the  sense. — '*  Wontd  serve  him  as  attendants. — '^  Myriad  oj 
myriads  teould  stand.— ^^  Literally,  cau.^ed  to  pats  away.  —^"^  And  a  lengthening  in  their  lives  wa*  giren  them  tilt. — '^  As  in 
chap.  vi.  26;  All  the  nations,  the  pefjples,  and  the  tongues.— ^^  Labor  fur. — '^^  Would  trouble.—'*^  Cpon.—'^"^  Would  a-^k 
from  him.—'"  Would  make.—'"  Or,  words,— '^  They.—'"  In  the  plur.,  like  most  names  of  Deity.— "^  kingdom  thefonrt/i, 
>s  It  the,—^>  To  the  side  o/.— '»  Or,  word,—''  I,—'''  Looks  would  be,\ 


EXEGETICAL   BEMARES. 

Verse  1.  Historkal  introduction.  In  the  first 
year  of  Belshazzar  j  hence,  in  the  first  year 
after  the  death  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  father 
and  predecessor  of  Belshazzar ;  see  on  chap.  v. 
1.*  This  designation  of  the  time  "seems  sub- 
stantially to .  have  furnished  the  occasion  for 
renewed  reflection  on  the  part  of  the  pro- 
phet, bearing  upon  the  former  series  of  pro- 
phetical meditations  that  had  been  called  forth 
in  him  by  an  important  event  (the  dream  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  concerning  the  image  of  the 
monarchies,  which  Daniel  interpreted,  chap.  ii. ). 
The  idea  of  the  four  heathen  kingdoms  which 
were  to  precede  the  intioduction  of  the  Messi- 
anic kingdom  of  Israel,  that  was  announced  by 
the  earlier  prophets  and  believed  by  them  to  be 
near,  is  again  brought  out  comprehensively  in 
this  place,  with  reference  to  the  course  observed 
by  those  kingdoms  toward  the  theocracy " 
(Kranichfeld).  —  Concerning  the  chronological 
parallelism  of  the  series  of  apocalyptic  visions, 
opened  by  this  new  vision  of  the  monarchies, 
with  the  series  of  historical  events  recorded  in 
the  former  division  of  the  book,  and  beginning 
with  chap.  ii. ,  see  the  Introd. ,  §  3. — Daniel  had 
a  dream  and  visions  of  his  head  upon  his  bed. 
Cf.  chap.  ii.  I'J;  and  with  reference  to  the 
visions  of  his  head,  cf.  ii.  28. — Then  he  iwrote 
the  dream,  immediately  or  soon  after  it  trans- 
pired ;  a  note  intended  to  strengthen  the  follow- 
ing .statements  concerning  its  nature  (cf.  chap, 
xii.  4).  This  note,  however,  as  the  change  of 
person  between  vs.  1  and  2  indicates,  was  proba- 
bly introduced  by  the  author  at  a  later  time,  in 

*  [This  assumption  rests  upon  the  author's  theory  that 
Belshazzar  is  identical  with  Kvil-merodach,  which,  as  we 
have  shown  in  the  notes  appended  to  the  Introduction,  is  not 
sustained  by  the  Ir-test  authorities  or.  Babylonian  hist'jry. 
If  Rawlinsou's  conjecture  is  correct,  that  Belshazzar  was 
the  son  of  Nahouned,  left  in  command  of  Babylon  while  his 
father  threw  himself  into  Borsippa.  the  date  in  questif'n  will 
rt-laie  ti)  the  viceroyship  of  the  former,  which  may  well  have 
r.ontinued  a  year  or  more  (or  even  into  the  third  year,  see 
chap.  viii.  1),  since  tb-  -lege  of  B.ibylon  lasted  two  years.] 


connection  with  his  final  revision  of  the  whole 
book.  The  closing  verse  of  the  chapter,  which 
likewise  is  merely  important  as  a  transitional 
passage,  seems  also  to  be  a  later  addition. — And 
told  the  sum  of  the  matters ;  gave  the  leading 
features.  P^'r  "'*'^,  the  sum  or  substance  of 
the  words  ;  cf.  •,;;5t-i  in  passages  like  Lev.  v.  24  ; 
Psa.  cxix.  160;  and  also  the  Talmudic  ^■,i"st-i 
S-'-^T  (Hash  /task.,  II.  0),  and  the  Gr.  i..'^.i/-<!;oi-, 
which  is  employed  in  this  place  by  the  Sept. 
The  "sum"  signifies,  of  course,  the  aggregate 
of  all  that  is  of  Messianic  significance.  Cf. 
Ewald  :  "AVhen  it  is  said  that  Daniel  merely 
recorded  the  leading  features,  or  gave  a  mere 
summary,  of  the  wonderful  visions  which  he 
saw,  the  meaning  becomes  evident,  when  it  is 
observed  with  what  freedom  the  leading  outlines 
of  the  visions  are  drawn  in  the  first  two  turns  of 
the  description  (vs.  1-14),  and  are  afterward  re- 
peated for  the  purpose  of  interpretation.  All 
the  remaining  prophetic  sections  of  the  book 
have  the  same  plan  in  substance  ;  but  whenever 
it  is  attempted  to  record  personal  experiences 
and  observations  in  writing,  it  is  advisable  to 
furnish  the  briefest  outline  consistent  with  clear- 
ness, on  account  of  the  readers,  if  for  no  other 
reason."  * 

♦  ["This  vision  accords  not  only  in  many  respects  with  the 
dreR.z.  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (ch.  ii),  but  has  the  same  subject. 
Thi^  subject,  however,  the  representation  of  the  world-power 
in  its  principal  forms,  is  differently  given  in  the  two  chaji- 
ters.  In  ch.  li.  H  Is  represented  according  to  its  whole  char- 
acter as  an  image  of  a  man  whose  different  parts  consist  of 
different  metals,  and  in  chap.  vii.  under  the  figure  of  four 
beasts  which  arise  one  after  the  other  outof  the  sea.  In  the 
former,  its  destruction  is  represented  by  a  stone  breaking 
the  image  in  pieces,  while  in  the  latter  it  is  effected  by  a 
solemn  act  of  judgment.  This  further  difference  also  is  to 
be  observed,  that  in  thia  chapter,  the  first,  bttt  chiefly  the 
fourth,  world-kingdom,  in  its  development  and  relation  to 
the  people  of  God,  is  much  mor«  clearly  exhibited  in  ch.  ii. 
These  differences  have  their  principal  reason  in  the  differ- 
ence of  the  recipients  of  the  liivine  revelation  :  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, the  founder  of  the  world-power,  saw  this  power  in  its 
imposing  greatness  and  glory ;  while  Daniel,  the  prophet  of 
God,  saw  it  in  its  opposition  to  God  in  the  form  of  ravenous 
beasts  of  prey.  Nebuchadnezzar  had  his  dream  in  the  second 
year  of  his  reign,  when  he  had  just  founded  his  world-mon- 
archy ;  while  Daniel  had  his  vi-sion  of  the  wor'd-kingdoinf 


150 


THE  PEOPHET  DANIEL. 


Vei-ses  2,  3.  T.\e  entrance  of  the  fmtr  beasts. 
Daniel  spake  and  said.  The  incoherence  of 
these  words  with  the  statements  of  v.  1  seems 
to  indicate  that  they  no  longer  belong  (as  Kran- 
ichfeld  believes)  to  the  supplementary  note,  v. 
1,  but  that  they  originally  served  to  introduce  the 
description  of  the  vision. — I  saw  in  my  vision 
bynight;  C>',  "during,  by,"  spoken  of  syn- 
chronous things  ;  cf.  chap.  iii.  33.— And  behold, 
the  four  winds  of  the  heavens  strove  ('•  broke 
forth  ")  upon  the  great  sea.  Concerning  1"l?*i 
see  on  chap.  ii.  31. — The  fourfold  number  of  the 
'■  winds  of  the  heaven  "  ij.e..  the  winds  blowing 
from  the  different  quarters  of  heaven,  or,  more 
simply,  those  blowing  Hinder  heaven;  cf.  "the 
birds  of  heaven  ")  has  reference,  of  course,  to 
that  of  the  beasts  in  v.  3  et  seq.  It  designates 
all  the  winds  of  the  world  (cf.  chap.  viii.  8; 
Zech.  vi.  5 ;  Jer.  xlix.  36),  and  therefore  indi- 
cates at  the  outset  the  universal  importance  of 
the  following  vision.  Hence  actual  winds  must 
be  intended,  and  not  ^' nngelkcB  potentates'"  as 
Jerome  suggests,  under  reference  to  Deut.  xxxii. 
8  (Sept.).*  It  is  not  necessary  to  ask,  in  con- 
nection with  a  dream-vision,  how  all  the  four 
winds  could  arise  together  ;  nor  ho%T  the  great 
sea  {i.e..  probably  the  Irtediterranean,  the  ocean 
of  the  nations  of  hither  Asia  ;  cf .  Josh.  xv.  48) 
could  enter  into  the  dream  of  an  Israelite  who 
resided  from  his  early  youth  at  Babylon.  The 
sea,  as  is  frequent  in  prophetic  figurative  lan- 
guage of  the  Old  Testament,  represents  the 
heathen  world  of  nations,  which  unquestionably 
afforded  a  striking  illustration  in  every  case 
when  they  arose  in  hostility  against  the  theo- 
cracy, in  order  to  overwhelm  and  destroy  the 
constantly-diminishing  people  of  God,  as  the 
raging  waves  of  the  ocean  break  upon  an  insig- 
nificant island  or  coast.  Cf.  Isa.  viii.  7  et  .seq.  ; 
xvii.  12;  xxvii.  1  ;  Ivii.  20;  Psa.  xlvi.  4;  also 
Rev.  viii  8;  xvii.  15  ;  and  with  reference  to  the 
overflowing  (by  hostile  forces)  see  Dan.  ix.  2(j ; 
xi.  10,  22,  26.— »?"_!?  in-37;  may  be  properly 
translated  "  breaking  forth  iipo7i  the  sea,  break- 
ing loose  against  the  sea  ;  "  on  n'^p,  cf .  the  corre- 
sponding Heb.  word  in  Job  xl.  23 ;  Ezek.  xxxii. 
22.  and  also  the  Syr.  and  Targum.  usage,  which 
principally  employs  the  word  to  represent  the 
hostile  irruption  of  warlike  forces.  Less  natural 
is  the  factitive  renderingof  the  partic,  '^cmised 
t'ue  great  sea  to  break  forth"  (Kranichf. ),  and 
the  reciprocal,  by  Luther,  "stormed  against 
each  other  on  the  great  sea  (cf.  Ewald's  "  swept 
through  the  great  sea  ") ;  the  prep.  3  seems  not 
Bnited  to  either  conception.! — Verse  3.  And 
four  (excessively)  great  beasts  came  up  from 
the  sea.  The  strengthening  of  the  idea  impUed 
in  the  reduplicated  l^"?"]  may  be  rendered, 
with  Ewald.  by  "  monstrous,"  or  by  an  adverb 
^f  comparison  prefixed  to  "great,"  as  "very, 


and  of  the  judgment  against  them  in  the  first  .vcar  of  Bel- 
fehazzar,  when  the  glory  of  the  world-monarchy  hogan  to 
fade,  and  the  spirit  of  its  opposition  to  God  became  more 
manifest.'' — A'ciV.] 

♦  [Keil's  remark,  however,  Is  apposite:  "The  winds  o/ 
the  henntnH  rcpr("»ent  the  heavenly  powers  and  forces  by 
which  tfOd  sets  tht  nations  of  the  world  in  motion."] 

t  (We  snggeiit  that  the  preposition  rather  indicates  the 
4>rti'll-m  of  the  winds  as  converging  to  this  one  point  as  a 
•**!ne  el  eontiict.l 


excessively,"  etc.  *  Kranichf  eld  is  incorrect  an  J 
interpolating:  "four  ravenous  beasts." — The 
rising  of  "the  beasts  from  the  sea"  describes, 
figurtttively,  their  rising  out  of  the  great  unde- 
fined, and,  so  to  speak,  mist- enveloped  sea  of 
nations,  and  their  more  noticeable  entrance  into 
the  range  of  the  dreaming  prophet's  vision. 
There  is  therefore  no  allusion  to  a  coming  up 
out  of  the  sea  to  the  land  (unlike  Gen.  xli.  2,  18 
et  seq.),  especially  since,  in  the  parallel  descrip- 
tion in  V.  17,  four  kings,  corresponding  to  the 
four  bea.st8,  arise  "out  of  the  earth."  ["  These 
four  fierce  beasts  arise,  not  all  at  once,  but,  as 
ver.  6  and  7  teach,  one  after  another  "  {KeiV).\ — 
Concerning  the  representation  of  nations  or 
kingdoms  under  the  figure  of  certain  beasts, 
especially  ravenous  beasts,  monsters  (cf.  Isa. 
xxvii.  1;  li.  9  ;  Ezek.  xxix.  3;  xxxii.  2;  Psa. 
Ixviii.  31 ;  Ixxiv.  1 3),  see  Ewald :  "  It  is  an 
ancient  habit  to  regard  beasts  as  symbols  of 
kings  and  empires  ;  but  it  first  became  really 
significant  through  the  custom  of  emblazoning 
them  on  standards  and  arms,  especially  on 
shields,  and  also  on  permanent  monuments  and 
works  of  art,  as  standing  symbols.  The  most 
ancient  picture-writing  in  Egypt  and  Assyria 
afterward  contributed  its  part  to  introduce  an 
intimate  connection  in  thought  between  a  figur- 
ative creature  and  a  kingdom  corresponding  to 
it.  It  is  now  known  that  each  of  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel  bore  the  figure  of  an  animal  on 
its  standard  and  its  coat  of  arms  ;  and  likewise 
that  every  representative  of  a  tribe  could  wear 
such  a  symbol,  while  a  king  could  elevate  the 
symbol  of  his  tribe  to  the  dignity  of  a  national 
emblem"  (Geschichte  des  V.  Israel,  III.  341, 
849).  Certain  animals,  such  as  the  lion,  panther, 
and  ox,  would  naturally  be  suggested  in  any 
case ;  and  others  would  be  chosen  by  way  of 
contrast.  But  nowhere  would  such  animal- 
symbols  be  likely  to  become  so  significant  as  in 
the  ancient  Assyrian  empire.  This  has  become 
the  more  certain,  since  the  frequent  colossal  an- 
imals scnttered  among  the  ruins  of  Nineveh  and 
other  places,  which  served  as  symbols  of  the 
power  and  greatness  of  that  empire,  i.  e. ,  of  its 
kings  and  gods,  have  been  brought  to  light. 
Hence,  after  Assj'ria  and  the  other  great  powers 
of  the  ancient  world  had,  from  the  8th  and  7th 
centuries  B.  C,  been  opposed  to  the  Israelites, 
whom  the  latter  were  continually  less  and  less 
able  to  resist,  their  poets  and  orators  adopted 
the  custom  of  designating  them  on  proper  occa- 
sions by  such  symbols,  e.  g..  Assyria  as  a  lion  or 
as  a  "  reed-be.-ist,"  and  Egypt  as  a  crocodile  or 
dragon.  As  a  consequence,  it  is  comprehensible 
why  animals  were  chosen  here  and  in  chapters 
vii.  and  viii.  as  symbols  of  the  great  monarchies 
beginning  with  the  Assyrio-Chalda^an,  although 
these  animals  are  selected  independently,  be- 
cause an  entirely  new  conception  is  here  intro- 
duced. Since  an  increased  spiritual  significance 
was  attributed  to  animals  as  the  emblems  of 
kingdoms,  it  would  become  possible  for  the  im- 
agination to  extend  such  figures  beyond  the 
realm  of  actual  creation,  and  to  construct  idea! 
I  forms ;  but  our  author  clearly  avoids  the  use  of 
wholly  imaginary  animals  for  this  purpose,  at 
being  inappropriate.     His  object  is  here  to  re- 


*  [The  reduplicated  form,  however,  seems  to  be  meiely  UH 
usual  one  in  Cbaldets.] 


CHAP.  VII.  1-28. 


151 


present  in  a  more  striking  and  impressive  man- 
ner the  four  succes.sive  changes  of  the  great 
world-kingdom  described  in  chap.  ii.  under  the 
figure  of  a  monstrous  human  image,  which 
aiforded  but  faint  analogies  ;  and  for  this  pur- 
po.se  he  selects  four  wild  beasts,  which  differ 
among  themselves  respectively,  and  which  over- 
come each  other  in  succe.ssion. — Diverse  one 
from  another,  for  the  reason  that  they  repre- 
sented distinct  kingdoms,  which  differed  from 
each  other  respectively,  and  were  peculiarly  con- 
stituted in  respect  to  their  national  chzu'acter 
and  their  political  tendencies.  These  distinc- 
tions are  now  to  be  brought  out  as  clearly  and 
prominently  as  possible,  thus  indicating  a  differ- 
ent purpose  from  that  connected  with  the  image 
of  the  monarchies,  which  was  chiefly  designed 
to  represent  the  perpetuation  of  the  same  hea- 
then world-power  throughout  the  four  succes- 
sive phases  of  its  development. 

Verses  i-H.  Mure  detailed  description  of  the 
four  beasts,  and  (specially  nf  the  fourt.i.  The 
first  -c^as  like  a  lion  and  had  eagle's  wings. 
The  emblem  of  a  wonderful  beast  so  constituted 
might  be  chosen  with  propriety  to  represent  the 
Chaldsean.  or,  if  it  be  preferred,  the  As.syrio- 
Chaldiean  world-power  (cf  supra,  Eth.-fund. 
principles,  etc.,  on  chap,  ii.),  since  the  winged 
lions  with  human  heads  recovered  at  Nimrud 
(Layard.  Xinei-eli  and  Babylon,  p.  348)  and  also 
the  similar  images  of  winged  animals  at  Babylon 
(Miinter,  Eeligion  der  Babylonier,  pp.  98.  139) 
were  doubtless  designed  as  symbols  of  the  power 
and  glory  of  that  empire  or  of  its  rulers.  In 
addition,  the  description  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as 
a  lion  in  strength  and  an  eagle  in  swiftness  was 
familiar  to  his  contemporaries,  as  may  be  seen  on 
the  one  hand,  in  Jer.  iv.  7  ;  xlix.  19  ;  1.  17,  44  ; 
on  the  other,  in  Jer.  xlix  22;  Lam.  iv.  19; 
Hab.  i.  8;  Ezek.  xvii.  3,  12.  Moreover,  the 
rank  of  the  lion  as  the  king  of  beasts,  and  of  the 
eagle  as  the  king  of  birds,  corresponds  to  that  of 
gold,  the  most  precious  of  metals,  which  had 
been  in  chap.  ii.  the  symbol  of  the  first  world- 
kingdom.  As  in  that  instance  (v.  3K)  the  king 
was  identified  with  his  realm,  and  therefore  was 
regarded  as  its  representative,  so  here  the  fate 
of  the  first  world-kingdom  is  illustrated  by  vari- 
ous traits  taken  from  the  history  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar in  chap.  iv. — I  beheld  till  the  wings 
thereof  were  plucked,  ;'.<;.,  until  its  power  and 
unrestrained  motion  were  taken  from  it ;  cf. 
chap.  iv.  28  et  seq. — And  it  was  lifted  up  from 
the  earth,  to  which,  after  being  deprived  of  its 
wii^gs.  it  had  been  confined  ;  compare  chap.  iv. 
80  with  iv.  33.  The  words,  therefore,  as  well 
as  those  which  follow,  relate  to  the  restoration 
from  a  state  of  beastly  degradation  to  the  up- 
right posture  and  free  dignity  of  man.  Others, 
as  Jerome,  Theodoret.  Rashi,  Bertholdt,  Hitzig, 
etc.,  render  it,  "and  it  was  taken  away  from 
the  earth,"  as  if  the  sentence  implied  the  de- 
struction of  the  Chalda^an  world-power ;  but 
neither  its  connection  with  the  following  con- 
text, nor  the  usual  meaning  of  I^:,  ''to  raise 
up,  elevate," — cf.  iv.  31  and  the  corresponding 
Heb.  verb.  Gen.  xxi.  18 — will  justify  this  read- 
ing.— And  made  (to)  stand  upon  ths  feet  as  a 
man;  cf.  chap.  iv.  13.  31,  33;  v.  21.  Notice 
the  suffixless  V.^J"  ;",  ••  upon  two  feet,"  instead 
of  "  on  its  two  feet,"  which  (corresponding  with 


3  Kings  xiii.  21)  would  have  been  employed  If 
the  description  had  from  the  first  referred  to 
Nebuchadnezzar  in  person.  [The  phrase  "  does 
not  mean  that  the  whole  beast  was  lifted  up  into 
the  air,  but  that  it  stood  upon  its  hinder  legs, 
taking  the  upright  position  of  a  man.  The  pur- 
pose of  this  is  explained  more  fully  by  the  clause 
that  follows. — Tl"^1  is  a  Hebraizing  dual  form, 

only   found   in   Biblical   Chaldee — The 

heart  of  a  mem  was  given  to  it,  i.e.  (in  connec- 
tion with  the  preceding  clause),  not  only  did  it 
take  the  outward  position  of  a  man,  but  also 
partook  of  his  internal  mind  and  feelings.  I 
understand  the  design  here  to  be  to  character- 
ize the  greater  moderation  and  humanity  which 
the  Babylonian  dominion  exhibited  after  Ne- 
buchadnezzar's malady  and  restoration,  or,  to 
use  the  language  of  the  prophet,  after  '  its 
wings  were  plucked.'  " — Stuart.] — See  Hitzig 
on  this  passage,  with  reference  to  the  at  times 
venturous  explanations  offered  by  exegetes  who 
deny  its  relation  to  chap.  iv.  in  any  way  what- 
ever {e.g.,  Bertholdt :  "  The  \vriter  designed  to 
indicate  in  this  place  that  human  empires  are 
symbolized  ;  "  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Dereser  :  "  The 
civilizing  of  the  formerly  barbarous  Chaldaaans, 
which  was  reserved  until  the  Babylonian  period, 
was  to  be  described  ;  "  Jerome,  Rashi,  Ibn-Ezra, 
etc.  :  '■  The  standing  upon  two  feet  of  the 
hitherto  four-footed  beast  was  to  symbolize  the 
humiliation  of  the  Chalda;ans  on  the  overthrow 
of  their  supremacy  ;  "  etc.,  etc. ). — Verse  5.  And 
behold  another  beast,  a  second,  like  to  a  bear. 
"'~nx  is  the  more  extended,  '"';V.^  the  more 
definite  idea  ;  the  former  only  Is  repeated  in  v. 
C,  and  the  latter  in  v.  7.  The  bear,  con-sidered 
as  being  second  only  to  the  lion  in  point  of 
strength  and  .savage  disposition,  is  frequently 
mentioned  in  close  connection  with  the  latter ; 
e.g.,  1  Sam.  xvii.  34  ;  Prov.  xxviii.  13  (cf.  xvii. 
12);  Wisd.  xi.  17. — And  it  raised  up  i-tself  on 
one  side ;  or  even,  ' '  it  stood  leaning  to  one  side  " 
(Hitzig),  as  it  is  to  be  rendered  on  the  authority 
of  the  reading  l^r.  "side"  (for  which  several 
MSS.  substitute  the  usual  Aram,  form  17?  • 
The  common  reading  i^'J  would  require  to  be 
regarded  as  synonymous  with  the  Heb.   ~t:'i"?3. 

"dominion"  (Job  xxxviii.  33),  but  would  thus 
lead  to  the  vapid  sense,  "  and  it  raised  up  one 
dominion,"  which  is  opposed  by  the  context,  and 
is  questionable  in  every  respect.  This  meaning, 
however,  has  recently  been  unsuccessfully  advo- 
cated by  Kranichfeld,  who  refers  to  the  erection 
of  a  Median  empire  on  the  ruins  of  the  Baby- 
lonian. Most  expositors  regard  it  correctly  as 
indicating  a  kjiiiing  posture  of  the  beast,  an  in- 
clination to  one  side.  Such  a  posture  would 
naturally  suggest  a  tendency  to  fall,  an  unsteady, 
vaccinating  character  of  the  monarchy  in  ques- 
tion, verging  upon  ruin — and  thus  it  has  been 
interpreted  by  the  Sept.,  Theodot. ,  the  Syr., 
and  by  many  modems,  as  Hitzi.g,  Ewald,  Kamp- 
hausen,  etc.,  who  find  here  a  reference  to  the 
weakness  and  brief  duration  of  the  Median  su- 
premacy, which  soon  gave  way  to  that  of  the 
Persians.  The  context,  however,  requires  that 
a  strong  kingdom,  animated  with  a  lust  for  con- 
quest— or,  in  the  figurative  language  of  the  text, 
a  "  voracious  "  kingdom— should  be  understood, 


152 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


to  which  the  words  "  arise,  devour  much  flesh," 
are  not  spoken  ironically  and  uselessly.  For 
this  reason  we  must  suppose  (with  HiiTemick  ; 
cf.  also  Bertholdt,  Von  Lengerke,  and  Maurer) 
that  the  beast  inclined /o/'iraj'rf,  i.e..  that  it  was 
prepared  to  spring  and  to  attack ;  and  this 
threatening,  rapacious,  and  warlike  posture  of 
the  beast  shows  clearly  that  not  the  weak  and 
shortlived  Median  kingdom,  but  the  powerful 
empire  of  the  Medo-Persians.  with  its  greed  for 
lands  and  conquest,  is  intended.  * — And  it  had 
three  ribs  in  the  mouth  of  it  between  the 
teeth  of  it.  T?)??  ~i?  evidently  designates  a 
prey  that  has  already  been  seized  by  the  beast, 
and  which  it  is  preparing  finally  to  devour  (cf. 
Num.  xi.  38  ;  Zech.  ix.  7),  and  not  (as  Saadia, 
Bertholdt,  and  Havemick  suppose)  parts  of  its 
own  body,  such  as  three  molar  teeth — an  inter- 
pretation which  i-'jij:;  nowhere  bears.  The 
three  states,  or  even  cities,  which  became  the 
prey  of  the  Persian  empire  as  symbolized  by  the 
"three  ribs,"  can  hardly  be  specified;  perhaps 
three  is  used  merely  as  a  round  and  indefinite 
number.  If,  however,  it  is  attempted  to  desig- 
nate them  more  particularly,  it  will  certainly  be 
more  appropriate  to  conceive  of  three  countries, 
e.<l.,  Babylon.  Egypt,  and  Lydia  (or,  instead  of 
the  latter,  Palestine,  including  Syria),  which 
were  conquered  by  the  Jledes  or  Medo-Persians 
(with  be  Wette),  than  (with  Hitzig)  to  think  of 
the  three  great  Assyrian  cities  on  the  Tigris, 
Nineveh,  Calah,  and  Resen, — or  Nineveh,  Mes- 
pila(y),  and  Larissa,  which,  according  to  Xeno- 
phon,  Ariab.,  III.  4,  10,  the  Medes  are  said  to 
have  destroyed  (cf.  Gen.  .\.  ]3;Jon.iii.  letseq.). 
—And  they  said  thus  unto  it,  Arise,  devour 
much  flesh.  These  words  evidently  refer  to 
something  in  the  history  of  the  Median  empire, 
that  is  subsequent  to  the  devouring  of  the  three 
ribs,  and  therefore  to  the  later  wars  of  that  state 
for  conquest  and  plunder,  which  followed  after 
the  subjugation  of  the  tliree  neighboring  king- 
doms. This  clearly  indicates  that  tlie  beast  de- 
scribed' in  this  connection   does  not  represent 

*  [Keil  adopts  a  different,  but,  as  it  seems  to  ns,  far- 
R'trhed  and  over-ingeniuns  interpretation:  "This  means 
neither  that  it  leaned  on  one  side  (Ebrardl.  nor  that  it  stood 
on  its  fore  feet  (Havemick),  for  the  sides  of  a  bear  are  not 
its  fore  and  hinder  parts ;  but  we  conceive  that  the  beast, 
resting  on  its  feet,  raised  up  the  feet  of  the  one  side  for  the 
purpose  of  goin^  fonv.ard,  and  so  raised  the  shoulder  or  the 
whole  tKxly  on  that  side.  But  with  such  a  motion  of  the 
b*i.nst  the  gtographical  situation  of  the  kingdom  (Geier, 
Mich.,  Ros.)  cannot  naturally  be  represented,  much  less  can 
the  near  approach  of  the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  (Hit- 
ligj  be  signified.  Hofmann,  Delitzsch,  and  JCliefoth  have 
found  the  right  intcrprct.ition  by  a  reference  to  ch.  ii.  and 
viii.  As  in  ch.  ii.  the  arras  on  each  side  of  the  breast  sig- 
nify that  the  second  kingdom  will  consist  of  two  parts,  and 
this  is  more  distinctly  indicated  in  ch.  viii.  by  the  two  horns, 
one  of  which  ruse  up  after  the  other,  and  higher,  so  also  in 
this  ver^e  the  double-sidcdncss  of  this  world-kingdom  is  re- 
presented by  the  beast  lifting  itself  up  on  one  side.  The 
Medo- Persian  bear,  as  such,  has,  as  Kliefoth  well  remarks, 
two  sides ;  the  one.  the  Median  side,  is  at  rest  after  the 
efforts  made  for  the  erection  of  the  world-kingdom  ;  but  the 
other,  the  Persian  side,  raises  itself  up.  and  then  becomes 
not  only  higher  than  the  first  but  also  is  prepared  for  new 
rapine.'' — Stuart  justly  remarks  that  "'the  difhcult.v  seems  to 
have  arisen  from  the  fact  that,  until  lately,  we  have  been 
Ignorant  of  a  like  symbol  sculptured  on  the  ancient  monn 
ments  of  Persia.  Mi'mter  {Rel.  der  Uab.,  p.  112)  hns  given 
ns  a  description  (with  an  engraving)  of  an  animal  of  the 
Bymbolic  kind,  in  a  group  near  the  star  of  Belus,  which, 
kneeling  or  lying  on  tlic  right  foot,  has  its  left  one  erect.  A 
sense  of  ser-urity,  combined  with  watchfulness,  seems  to  be 
the  indication.  Pnihably  this  symbol,  now  on  the  monu- 
ments of  Persia  and  Babyl  m.  was  a  part  of  what  belonged 
to  the  instgnUi  of  the  rx)yal  and  national  standards."] 


Media  only,  but  the  united  Medo-Persian  empire 
(against  Ewald,  Kranichfeld,  etc.,  and  also 
against  Hitzig,  who  applies  this  command  to 
"devour  much  flesh"  to  the  overthrow  of  the 
Chaldsean  empire  by  the  Medes,  which  he  be- 
lieves to  have  preceded  the  destruction  of  the 
three  cities  on  the  Tigris) .  The  direction  to 
devour  much  flesh  is,  however,  an  appropriate 
feature  in  the  description  of  the  voracity  of  this 
^Ciov  Tva/j(i>a-,(rf  •  cf.  Micah  iii.  2,  ii  ;  Isa.  ix.  11 ; 
Jer.  1.  17.  The  speakers  who  are  implied  (T~  r?'' 
as  in  chap.  iu.  4  ;  iv.  28)  are  the  angelic  powers 
of  God,  who  govern  the  world  and  especially 
watch  over  and  guide  the  fortunes  of  the  great 
world-powers.* — Verse  6.  After  this  I  beheld, 
and  lo  another,  like  a  leopard,  which  had 
upon  the  back  of  it  four  wings  of  (or  "  like  ")  a 
fowl.  Ewald  observes,  with  entire  correctness  : 
"This  beast  is  already  distinguished  from  the 
other  in  being  less  one-sided,  and  in  having  '  four 
wings  of  a  bird  ' — !.  e. ,  such  as  are  large  and  capa- 
ble of  carrying  it  swiftly  to  anj  place — on  its  back. 
[It  moves,  however,  "  not  so  royally  as  Nebuch- 
adnezzar— for  the  panther  has  not  eagle's  wings 
but  only  the  wings  of  a  fowl — yet  extending  to 
all  the  regions  of  the  earth  "  (KeU).]  Hence  it 
can  move  with  ease  and  freedom  towards  either 
of  the  four  regions  of  the  world,  and  therefore, 
in  a  sense,  it  possesses  all  the  four  regions  of  the 
world,  i.e.,  it  is  in  the  full  sense  a  world-king- 
dom." Cf.  Kranichfeld  also:  "The  flashing 
swiftness  of  movement,  the  Trnpdri/tof  o;rr7,c 
(Hab.  i.  8),  which  is  here  specially  indicated  by 
'  four  wings  of  a  fowl  on  the  back  of  it,'  i.e.,  in 
a  condition  for  flying,  is  regarded  as  character- 
istic of  this  beast  (the  leopard)  while  lurking  f  oi 
its  prey  (Jer.  v.  6  ;  Hos.  xiii.  7).  Compared 
with  the  clearness  and  correctness  of  this  inter- 
pretation there  seems  to  be  a  strange  lack  of 
motive  for  the  refusal  of  the  two  scholars  to 
apply  it  to  that  world-kingdom,  which  more 
than  any  other  was  remarkable  for  its  extension 
by  leaps  of  panther-lilje  swiftness,  and  by  the 
lightning-like  rapidity  of  its  rise  and  fall — 
namely,  the  Macedonian  empire  of  Alex,  the  Gr." 
Cf.  the  remark  of  Hitzig :  "  The  special  rapidity 
of  the  Persian  movements  to  war  and  «ctory 
cannot  be  historically  established  " — certainly  a 
con-ect  remark,  but  one  which  ought  not  to 
have  decided  its  author,  who  was  likewise  an 
opponent  of  the  Macedonian  hypothesis,  to  re- 
gard the  four  wings  in  thig  instance,  not  as  sym- 
bols of  rapid  movement,  but  as  "  an  emblem  of 
the  far-reaching  protecting  royal  power  from 
above  "  (after  Lam.  iv.  20 ;  Psa.  xxxvi.  8). — The 
beast  had  also  four  heads,  i.e.,  it  extended  its 
dominion  in  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth,  and 
governed  the  whole  world.  The  words  which 
follow,  "  and  dominion  was  given  unto  it,"  are 
probably  merely  epexegetical  of  this  symbolical 
description,  in  which  the  four  heads  have  the 
same  significance  as  the  pushing  of  the  ram 
towards  the  four  quarters  of  the  heavens  in 
chap.  viii.  4,  or  as  the  four  faces  of  the  cherubs 
which  looked  towards  the  four  quarters  of  tha 
earth  in  Ezek.  i.  10  et  seq.  If  it  is  desired  to 
interpret  the  four  heads  more  closely,  they  may 
be  taken  to  represent  the  four  principal  divisioni 

•  ("Thcplur.  •p-.?:S  t'«  (mpersoMi"  (KeU);  "ItmigM 
be  rendered  passively  "  (Stuart).] 


CHAP.   VII.  1-38. 


153 


or  aggregates  of  coiintries  which  the  empire  of 
Alexander  embraced  (cf  Hiivemick  on  this  pas- 
sage), e.g.,  Greece,  Western  Asia,  Egj-pt,  and 
Persia  (including  India).  This  is  less  arbitrary, 
at  least,  than  the  opinion  of  Jerome,  that  the 
heads  represented  the  four  leading  generals  of 
Alexander,  vix.  :  Ptolemy,  Seleucus,  Philip,  and 
Antigonus,  or  than  the  faTorite  assumption  of 
many  moderns  after  Von  Lengerke  (e.g..,  Hitzig, 
Ewald,  Kamphausen,  etc),  that  the  author 
represents  the  four  earliest  Persian  kings,  from 
Cyrus  to  Xerxes,  who  alone  were  known  to  him 
as  the  four  heads  of  the  leopard.  The  advocates 
of  the  latter  opinion  refer  for  support  to  chap. 
xi.  2,  which  passage,  however,  does  not  even 
imply  that  Daniel  knew  of  but  four  kings  of 
Persia  (see  on  that  passage),  to  say  nothing  of 
its  affording  no  proof  whatever  that  the  present 
passage  is  concerned  with  any  Persian  kings. 
Our  apocalyptist  does  not  represent  kings  by 
heads,  but  by  horns  (see  vs.  8  and  34  et  seq. ) ;  a 
feature  which  recurs  in  the  apocalypse  of  St. 
John,  where  the  ten  horns  of  the  beast  (Rev. 
xvii.  13)  symbolize  ten  kings,  while  the  seven 
heads  indicate  seven  mountains.  This  analogy 
seems  to  favor  the  view  of  Hiivemick,  which 
assumes  that  the  four  heads  represent  the  four 
principal  sections  of  the  world-kingdom  in  ques- 
tion, but  of  course  without  demonstrating  its 
correctness. — Verse  7.  After  this  I  saw  in  the 
night  visions,  and  behold  a  fourth  beast, 
dieadful  and  t3rrible,  and  strong  exceeding- 
ly. Observe  the  solemn  minuteness  with  which 
the  fourth  beast  is  introduced,  and  also  the 
description  as  both  "  dreadful  and  terrible," 
-rr^KT  "O^riT  ;  cf.  Chr.  B.  Michaelis  :  "  Juiig- 
untiir  duo  symmymn,  nd  intendendum,  rem  signi- 
ficiiUiiii.  lit  h(vc  bentia  rwn  vulgariter,  sed  supra 
nwdnm  hnrrihili^ apparuisge  tideatur."  * — And  it 
had  great  iron  teeth.  Iron  is  mentioned  as 
signifying  firmness  and  incisive  sharpness  (cf. 
Jer.  XV.  12  ;  Mic.  iv.  13),  while  the  teeth  sym- 
bolize its  lust  of  conquest  (cf.  V.  5). — It  devoured 
and  brake  in  pieces  a  id  stamped  the  residue 
with  the  feet  of  it.    Unlike  the  other  beasts,  it 


*  ["The  writer  gives  to  thi6  fourth  bea.=it  no  particular 
name.  Plainly  it  was  e  peculiar  monster.  The  reason  why 
he  omits  a  name  seems  to  be,  that  in  the  world  of  nature  no 
similitude  could  be  found,  for  in  no  cai^  of  really-exifiting 
be;ists  are  four  of  them  united  in  one,  so  as  to  constitute  an 
appropriate  symlwl  for  the  four  kingdoms  of  Alexander's 
successors.  He  classes  the-^;  under  the  dynasty,  comprehen- 
sively considered,  which  grew  up  out  of  the  predominance  or 
victories  of  the  Greeks  in  the  East.  But  when  enouu'h  is 
Introduced  to  desi^ate  the  general  nature  of  the  dynasty, 
both  here  and  in  ch.  viii.  and  xi..  he  goes  over  into  a  notice 
of  only  such  kings  as  were  in  the  neighborhood  of  Palestine, 
and  had  more  or  less  to  do  with  annoying  it.  As  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  was  incomparably  the  most  annoying  and  mis- 
chievous of  them  all,  so  a  peculiar  share  of  the  prophecy 
respecting  the  fourth  dynisty  is  allotted  to  him  in  each  of 
the  chapters  named,  it  is  evident  from  a  comparison  of 
historical  facts  as  well  as  from  the  nature  of  the  casp^  that 
a  dynasty  is  spoken  of  by  Daniel  as  more  or  less  dreadful  and 
de.structive  according  to  the  measure  iu  which  P;ile*.tine  was 
actUiiUy  affected  by  it  in  this  way." — Stuart.  Keil.  on  the 
contrary,  who  adopts  the  common  or  "  orthodox  "  interpre- 
tation of  the  fourth  monarchy,  gives  a  different  explanation 
of  this  feature  ;  "  The  fourth  kingdom  is  represented  by  a 
nameless  be,'\st.  because  in  Daniel's  time  Rome  had  not  come 
into  contact  uith  Israel,  and  as  yet  lay  beyond  the  circle  of 
vision  of  OM-Testament  prophecy."  This  candid  adraiss-on 
one  would  think  might  have  led  the  commentator  to  doubt 
any  reference  even  here  to  Rome.  He  does  not  seem,  more- 
o\  er,  to  have  perceived  that  fur  precisely  the  same  reason 
the  Macedonian  emi)ire  should  have  tjeen  represented  by 
■ome  namelesa  beast,  as  being  hitherto  unknown  to  the 
HebrewB.] 


was  not  content  with  simply  securing  its  prey, 
but,  rejoicing  in  destruction,  it  stamped  with  its 
feet  what  it  could  not  devour.     This  description 
evidently  does  not  indicate  that  the  conquests  of 
the    fourth   world-kingdom   were    more    exten- 
sive than  those  of  its  predecessors,  but  merely 
that  its  course  was  more  devastating  and  de- 
structive.    This   obviously   alludes   to   the   de- 
scription of  the  legs  of  iron  and  clay  (the  organs 
employed   in    treading    and    stamping),    whi'h 
belonged  to  the  colossus  in  chap,  ii.,  and  corre- 
sponds fuUy  to  the  actual  character  of  the  em- 
pires of  the  Macedonian  Diadochi,  and  particu- 
larly that  of  the  Seleucidae.     Cf.  Kranichfeld  : 
'■  It  is  generally  acknowledged  that  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  fourth  beast  agrees  in  its  leading 
features   with  that  of  the    fourth   kingdom  in 
chap.  ii.  40  ;  especially  in  regard  to  its  rage  for 
destruction,   which   crushed   without   pity   and 
trode  everything  under  foot.     Even  the  iron,  the 
medium  of  destruction   in   chap.   ii.  23,  40.  re- 
turns here  in  the  large  teeth  of  the  monster. 
The  terrible  appearance  of  the  colossus  resulted 
primarily  from  its  fourth  constituent  part,  and 
corresponding  to  this,  the  qualities  which  pro- 
duce a  terrible  appearance   are  here  expressly 
connected  with  the  fonn  of  the  fourth  beast." — 
And  it  was  diverse  from  all  the  beasts  before 
it.     This  does  not  assert  that  "it  combined  in 
itself  all  that  was  prominent  in  the  three  former 
beasts,  the  lion,  bear,  and  leopard  respectively  " 
(Jerome,    Havernick,   et  al.,   under   comparison 
with  Rev.  xiii.   2),  but  merely   that  it  differed 
from  them  all.  and  displayed  its  nature  in  a  way 
that  could  not  be  realized  by  a  comparison  with 
the  lion,  the  bear,  or  the  leopard.     This  differ- 
ence of  the  fourth  beast  from  all  the  others  is 
chiefly  suggestive  of  the  fragmeiit^iry  and  diiided 
character   of   the    fourth   world-kingdom,    and 
consequently  alludes  to  the  composition  of  the 
feet  of  the  colossus  out  of  intermingled  iron  and 
clay.*      The   opinion  of  Hiivemick   and   other 
advocates  of  the  theory  which  regards  the  Roman 
empire  as  the  fourth  world-kingdom,  that  this 
description  indicates  the  contrast  between  the 
character  of  that  empire  and  that  of  the  Orien- 
tal-Hellenistic monarchies  which  preceded  it,  is 
entirely  too  far-fetched  ;  but  that  of  Hitzig  is  no 
less  so,  when,  in  the  support  of  his  theory  that 
the  fourth  beast  represents  Alexander  the  Great, 
he  asserts  that  the  contrast  between  the  Hellen- 
istic and  the  Oriental  rule  is  here  indicated — a 
contrast  that  was  far  greater  than  that  between 
Rome  and  the  world-kingdoms  which  preceded 
it. — And  it  had  ten  boms.     According  to  v.  24 
these  ten  horns  represent  '"  ten  kings."     Unlike 
ordinary  animals,   which  have  two  horns,  this 
monster  representing  the  fourth  world-kingdom 
has  ten,  being  so  many  symbols  of  warlike  power 
and  dominion  (cf.  Deut.  xxxiii.  17  ;   1   Sam.  ii. 
1  ,  10;  Psa.  xviii.  3  ;  Job  xvi.  15;   Mic.   iv.  13, 
etc.  ) .     The  number  ten  is  hardly  to  be  strained, 
in  this  connection,   to   represent   ten   specified 
kings  ;  but  like  the  number  four  in  v.  6,  it  is 
rather  to  be  taken  in  a  symbolic  sense,  and  to  be 
regarded  as  indicating  a  multiplicity  of  rulers, 
or  an  indefinitely  large  number  of  kings — in  har- 
mony with  the  usual  significance  of  the  number, 

•  [May  not  the  diversity  rather  consist  in  the  fact  that, 
anllke  all  the  former  governments,  the  Seleucid  dynastj 
began  a  systematic  attack  upon  the  religwus  institutioiu 
of  the  sabject  Jews?] 


154- 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


both  in  the  Scriptures  and  elsewhere,  as  the 
symbol  of  earthly  perfection.*  Kranichfeld 
observes  correctly,  "It  is  clearly  not  in  the 
nature  of  the  prophetic  idea,  that  the  number 
ten,  in  addition  to  the  value  vfhich  it  thus  has 
for  the  w-riter,  should  be  capable  of  being  de- 
monstrated on  the  analog-y  of  ordinary  numer- 
als, iii  the  realization  of  the  picture  of  the 
future."  The  notes  on  chap.  xi.  noil  show  that 
in  the  more  detailed  description  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  fourth  world-power  in  that  place, 
there  is  by  no  means  an  exact  enumeration  of 
ten  kings  on  the  throne  of  the  Seleucidae. — 
Verse  8.  And  behold,  there  came  up  among 
them  another  little  horn.  Concerning  ''"IH^' 
and  its  relation  to  the  succeeding  modifying 
predicate,  see  supra,  on  v.  5. — The  prophet  ob- 
serves the  rising  or  springing  up  of  this  little 
horn,  the  eleventh  one,  as  taking  place  between 
the  ten  which  already  existed  (notice  the  idea 
of  ountiimed  observation,  so  to  speak,  of  being 
lost  in  observation,  which  is  indicated  by  the 
expression  H^^n  ;3n'i"^,    "  I   was   engaged   in 

considering,  in  observing").  The  smaUnesa  of 
the  new  horn  in  this  case,  as  in  the  parallel  chap, 
viii.  9,  refers  merely  to  its  original  state,  not  to 
its  later  appearance  when  fully  grown;  for, 
according  to  v.  30,  it  was  then  greater  than  any 
of  the  other  horns.  Concerning  the  reading 
rpbp,  instead  of  ^"^..0,  see  Hitzig  on  this  pas- 
sage.— Before  (or  "by")  whom  there  were 
three  of  the  first  horns  plucked  up  by  the 
roots;  i.e.,  it  grew  so  strongly,  and  through  its 
growth  exercised  so  disturbing  an  influence  upon 
its  neighbors,  that  three  of  them  were  uprooted 
and  wholly  destroyed.  Here  also  the  definite 
number  "  three  "  is  hardly  to  be  strained  to  sig- 
nify precisely  three  kings,  who  were  overthrown 
by  the  monarch  represented  by  the  eleventh 
horu.f  The  prophecy  certainly  had  its  more 
immediate  Messianic  fulfilment  in  the  manner 
in  which  Antiochus  Epiphanes  rose  from  his 
originally  obscure  condition  to  the  throne  of  the 
Seleucidaj,  by  removing  two  or  perhaps  three  of 
his  rivals  (see  infra) ;  but  from  the  prophet's 
point  of  view,  involving  substantially  a  ruerely 
ideal,  or,  more  correctly,  a  dreara-like  indefinite 
view  of  the  future,  the  idea  of  precisely  this 
personage  in  future  history,  and  of  the  political 
conjunctures  preceding  his  accession  to  the 
throne,  was  assuredly  excluded. — And  behold, 
in  this  horn  were  eyes  like  the  eyes  of  a 
man.  Eyes  like  those  of  a  man,  human  eyes 
(therefore  two  in  number,  despite  the  plural 
V:"!^.  which  is  probably  substituted  for  the 
dual  for  euphonic  reasons  merely,  and  by  virtue 
of  a  usage  that  is  frequent  in  the  Chaldee).  are 
borne  by  the  horn  in  token  that  it  represents  a 

•  See  Leyrer,  art.  Zaftfen  in  Herzop's  Real-Encyklop., 
TOl.  18,  p.  -378 :  also  Zockler.  l/teologiu  naUiraliH,  I.  713  et 
Beq.  In  both  places  the  essentially  political  or  cosmtcat 
Bi^ificance  of  this  number  is  pointed  out,  in  opposition  to 
Delitzsch,  who  regard-^  it  as  the  symbol  of  Divine  perfection. 
Cf.  further,  Bahr.  .Si/mlmlik  dtttt  mos.  Knltu^,  I.  17,');  Jlof- 
mann,  WitiHuui/img  itnil  Erfiitlitng,  I,  75 :  Hengstenberg, 
Beitritge  z.  Eint.,  III.  3111.  605.  (On  the  contrary,  it  seems 
to  un  that  the  delinitencss  of  the  numbers  finer  and  three 
In  the  same  connection  requires  a  similar  definiteness  in  this 
Oumber  likewise.  See  f,ur  remarks  in  the  Ethico-funda- 
mental  principles,  etc.,  on  this  chap..  No.  8,  «.] 

t  [See,  however,  the  remarks  in  the  Ethico-fundamental 
principles,  etc.,  below,  3,  a.] 


van,*  and,  moreover,  a  wise,  judicious  man ; 
for  here  as  elsewhere  (e.g..  Ezek.  i.  18,  x.  12; 
eyes  are  the  symbol  of  understanding;  cf.  ^21:;, 
'*  to  look  at,  understand." — And  a  mouLh 
speaking  great  (or  "proud")  things;  a  far- 
ther indication  of  the  A  »mif;i  nature  and  charac 
ter  of  the  historical  personage  prefigured  by  the 
horn.  13~3"l  ii>;'?,  properly,  "  speaking  great 
or  monstrous  things  ;  "  cf.  supra,  on  v.  3,  and 
also  infra,  v.  11;  also  the  Heb.  DliilJ  ~3~) 
Psa.  xii.  4.  The  interpretation  in  v.  25  shows 
that  blasphemies  are  meant  by  this  "  spealdng 
of  great  things;  "  cf.  xi.  3U  ;  Rev.  xiii.  5. f 

Verses  9-13.  The  Dirine  judgment  upon  the 
world-powers.  I  beheld  (such  things)  tUl  the 
thrcnes  were  cast  down  (or  "  set ").  The  A.  V. 
is  literal  (T'^l).  The  chairs  of  the  Orientals 
consist  of  cushions,  which  are  not  set  down,  but 
laid  down,  and,  in  case  of  haste,  are  ca.tt  down  ; 
cf.  cKeivTo,  Rev.  iv.  2.  The  place  where  the 
thrones  are  set  is  not  in  heaven,  for  according 
to  V.  13  the  Son  of  man  descends  to  it  from 
heaven  ;  nor  is  it  on  the  earth,  but.  as  in  chap, 
xii.  7,  a  locality  intervening  between  heaven 
and  earth.  ["  Seats,  not  merely  a  throne  for 
God  the  judge,  but  a  number  of  seats  for  the 
assembly  sitting  in  judgment  with  God.  That 
assembly  consists  neither  of  the  elders  of  Israel 
(Rabbins),  nor  of  glorified  men  (Hengstenb.  on 
Rev.  iv.  4^,  but  of  angels  (Psa.  Ixxxix.  8).  who 
are  to  be  distinguished  from  the  thousands  and 
tens  of  thousands  mentioned  in  ver.  10,  for  those 
do  not  sit  upon  thrones,  but  stand  before  God 
as  servants  to  fulfil  his  commands  and  execute 
His  judgments"  (Keil).]  —  And  the  ("an") 
Ancient  of  days  did  sit;  viz.,  on  his  throne, 
in  order  to  preside  at  the  judgment ;  cf.  Psa.  ix. 
5;  xxix.  1(3;  Isa.  xxviii.  0.  The  "Ancient  of 
days"  (VO'i''  P"P?),  '■*••  ^^^  aged  in  days 
[-e-nlcuujiivnr  fjutpiir,  Sus.  52),  is  doubtless  the 
God  of  Israel,  the  same  as  the  Most  High,  v.  25, 
who  was  blasphemed  by  the  little  horn.  He  is 
described  as  the  "Ancient  of  days,"  probably 
not  by  way  of  comparison  with  the  younger  asso- 
ciated judges,  nor  yet  with  the  "blasphemous 
upstart,"  the  little  horn  (Kranichfeld),  but  in 
comparison  with  the  more  recent  gods  of  the 
heathen ;  cf.  Deut.  xxxii.  17 ;  Jer.  xxiii.  23. 
This  predicate  therefore  refers  to  that  attribute 
of  the  God  of  the  Old  Covenant,  which  is  desig- 
nated in  such  expressions  as  3~1^,  ''~-?^,  Deut, 
xxxiii.  27,  B"p  23i,  Psa.  Iv.  20;  jiaaiAnj^  tuv 
n'luivijv,  1  Tim.  i.  17  ;  0  -pdva^  Km  6  eoxarn^.  Rev. 
i.  17  (cf.  Isa.  xliv.  6 ;  xlviii.  12).  "  He,  who 
from  primitive  times  has  proven  Himself  a  pow- 
erful judge,  assumes  the  form  of  venerable  age, 
in  order  to  beget  the  confidence  that  He  pos- 


*  ["  The  eyes  of  a  man  were  not  attributed  to  it  (merely) 
in  oppcsition  to  a  beast,  but  in  opposition  to  a  hitrher  celes- 
tial beine,  for  whom  the  ruler  denoted  by  the  horn  might 
be  mistaken  on  account  of  the  terr  bleness  of  his  rule  and 
government :  '  tie  mm  putetmtftjiixta  Quontndatr,  opinion- 
ei.i  vel  diabolujn  eJite  vet  dcemonem,  sed  unum  de  ItonUiti- 
bits,  in  QUO  totu.t  Sataiinn  hattiturns  sit  roi-poi-eaiiter,^  as 
Jerome  well  remarks  ;  of,  Hofinimn  and  Kliefoth." — Kelt.} 

t  ["A  mouth  which  speaketh  great  things  is  a  vain 
glorious   mouth.      *12*31    are  preaumptnotis  things,    not 

directly  blasphemous  (Havr.).     In  the  Apocalypie,  xiii.  B, 
tityii\a  and  fi\a(rtt>i]iJ.iai  are  distinguished." — Keil,] 


CHAP.  VII.   1-38. 


155 


Eesses  the  wisdom  and  power  to  bring  the  blas- 
phemerto  judgment." — His  garment  was  white 
as  snow;  thus  correctly  Theodot.,  Vulg. ,  Hit- 
zig,  under  comparison  with  JIark  ix.  3.  but  con- 
flicting with  the  Masoretic  accentuation,  which 
requires  "  as  the  white  snow."  The  white  color 
of  the  garment  is  probably  not  designed  "  to  in- 
crease the  impression  of  awful  majesty  "  (Kran- 
ichf. ),  but  to  symbolize  the  purity  and  innocence 
of  the  judge.  He  appears,  "  so  to  speak,  robed 
in  the  ~P"i2  of  the  righteous  judge ; "  cf.  Isa. 
lix.  17;  Job  xxix.  14;  3  Chrou,  xix.  7,  and  also 
the  passages  which  mention  the  light,  the  sym- 
bol of  Iwliness,  as  the  garment  of  God,  e.g., 
Ezek.  i.  2(i  ;  Psa.  civ.  3;  1  Tim.  vi.  16.— And 
the  hair  of  his  head  like  the  pure  wool,  hence, 
likewise  as  white  as  snow,  as  in  the  case  of  a 
Tenerable  sage.  Cf.  the  parallelism  of  snow  and 
wool  in  passages  like  Isa.  i.  10  ;  Psa.  cxlvii.  10  ; 
Rev.  i.  14. — His  throne  like  the  fiery  flame; 
flashing  like  flaming  tire,  and  apparently  com- 
posed of  it.  The  mention  of  the  fiery  appear- 
ance of  the  throne  of  God,  does  not  of  itself  con- 
vey the  conception  of  flaming  vengeance  on  the 
Dart  of  the  strict  judge  (Deut.  iv.  24  ;  ix.  3  ; 
xxxii.  23  ;  Heb.  xii.  29,  etc.) ;  for  He  frequent- 
ly aiii)ears  surrounded  by  fire  in  cases  where  His 
judicial  character  is  not  involved,  f.,9. ,  Gen.  xv. 
17  ;  Ex.  iii.  3  ;  Psa.  xviii.  9,  etc.  In  the  pres- 
ent instance,  however,  the  judicial  significance 
of  the  fire  that  emanates  from  God  is  clearly 
established  by  the  connection,  as  in  Ex.  xix.  10  ; 
XX.  15  ;  Psa.  1.  3  et  seq.  (against  Hitzig  and  Von 
Cengerke).  — His  vrheels  as  burning  fire.  The 
throne  of  the  universal  judge  is  therefore  mount- 
-.A  on  wheels  (cf .  the  cherubic  chariot,  Ezek.  i. 
12  et  seq. ;  x.  13  et  seq.  ;  Psa.l.xxvii.  19),  whose 
BwiJt  revolutions  are  encompas.sed  with  flashing 
tre.  This  description  of  the  Divine  throne  of 
judgment  as  mounted  upon  wheels  leads  Kran- 
ichfek!  to  the  incongruous  opinion  that  the 
''casting  down  of  the  thrones"  was  accompa- 
nied with  noise  (!). — Verse  10.  A  fiery  stream 
is'sued  and  came  forth  from  him;  i.e.,  from 
the  Divine  Judge,  not  from  His  throne  ;  for  the 
"~T;"]~  of  the  first  sentence  can  hardly  be 
constraed  with  a  different  object  from  that  of 
the  second,  which  clearly  relates  to  God.  Nev- 
ertheless both  the  author  of  the  book  of  Enoch 
(xiv.  19)  and  the  writer  of  the  Apocalypse  (iv. 
9)  represent  the  fiery  stream  as  issuing  from  the 
throne,  in  the  descriptions  copied  by  them  from 
this  passage.  Ewald  interprets  the  "stream  of 
Sre "  as  a  "  stream  of  light,"  and  arbitrarily 
Taakes  it  the  symbol  of  the  speech  which  issues 
from  God,  that  is,  of  His  command  to  begin  the 
judgment  (in  support  of  which  he  appeals  to 
chap.  ii.  15;  vi.  27,  etc.,  whose  character  is  en- 
tirely different).  Hitzig  is  no  less  arbitrary  when 
he  remarks  that  the  stream  must  be  conceived 
as  flowing  evenly  over  a  smooth  bottom  (hence 
like  liquid  glowing  lava  !),  and  as  constituting 
the  floor  for  the  entire  scene  of  the  judicial  pro- 
cedure, since  without  this  "the  whole  appari- 
tion would  float  in  the  .lir  without  support " — an 
empty  fancy,  which  the  prophet's  language  in 
no  wise  favors.* — Thousand  thousands  minis- 


•  ["  Fire  unci  the  chining  of  fire  ftre  the  constjint  phen- 
omena uf  the  manifestiitiun  of  G-xi  in  the  woriil  as  the 
earthly  element*  mosr  fitting  for  the  representation  of  the 


tered  unto  him,  and  ten  thousand  times  ten 
thousand  stood  before  him.  The  imperfect 
tense  of  the  verbs  indicates  that  a  readiness  to 
serve  existed  in  the  thousands  as  a  constant  and 
enduring  quality.  Concerning  "  to  stand  before 
one"  as  synonymous  with  "to  serve,"  cf.  chap. 
i.  4. — In  relation  to  the  plural  ending  'i''—  in 
Q■'?3^t,  which  the  Keri  rejects  as  a  Hebraism, 
cf.  chap.  iv.  14  ;  Ezra  iv.  13.— The  Kethib  "0=1. 
(the  plural  of  13")  immedisitely  following  is 
likewise  to  be  retained,  in  opposition  to  the 
Hebraizing  Keri  133"]  ;  Hitzig' s  suggestion,  how- 
ever, to  write  'IST  (on  the  analogy  of  the  cor- 
responding Syr.  word)  instead  of  13'^  is  unne- 
cessary.—  The  "  thou.sand  thousands  and  ten 
thousand  times  ten  thousand  "  are  of  course  a 
host  of  ministering  angels,  which,  standing  in  a 
wide  circle,  surrounds  the  council  of  the  judges 
who  are  seiited  beside  God  (these  are  angels  of  a 
superior  order,  or  perhaps  "elders,"  cf.  Rev. 
iv.  4).  Cf.  Deut.  xxxiii.  2;  1  Kings  xxii.  19; 
Neh.  ix.  0;  Psa.  Ixviii.  18;  ciii.  20  etseq.,  and 
also  the  mention  of  the  angelic  hosts  in  Gen. 
xxxii.  3  ;  3  Kings  vi.  17,  etc.  The  numbers 
1,000  and  10,000  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  defin- 
ite ;  they  indicate,  in  a  symbolic  manner,  the 
impression  of  an  innumerable  multitude  which 
was  made  on  the  prophet  in  his  dream-vision, 
while  he  was  naturally  in  uo  condition  to  over- 
look the  whole  of  this  immense  host,  to  say 
nothing  of  counting  its  numbers  exactly  ;  cf . 
Psa.  Ixviii.  18;  xci.  7.* — The  judgment  was 
set.  "P'l  is  properly  an  abstract  word,  signify- 
ing. "  judgment ;  "  here  used  concretely  to  de- 
signate the  judicial  conclave  composed  of  the 
superior  angels— the  angelic  princes  or  archan- 
gels (cf.  Josh.  v.  14;  Tob.  xii.  15,  etc.) ;  cf.  the 
analogous  use  of  judicium  in  the  concrete  by 
Cicero,  Tf  ;■/■.,  II.  18.  Since  chairs  indeed  were 
mentioned  in  the  foregoing  (v.  0  a),  but  nothing 
was  said  about  the  judges  taking  their  seats,  we 
must  find  it  indicated  in  this  place,  and  it  is 
therefore  not  necessary  to  explain,  with  Dathe 
and  Kr.anichfeld,  that  "  He  seated  Himself  in 
judgment "  (the  Ancient  of  d.iys),  as  if  this  were 
merely  a  repetition  of  -T\^  in  v.  9  (similarly  also 
Syrus,  who  read  S*-.',!  instead  of  S*;"''^,  and 
therefore  renders  it,  "the  judge  seated  him- 
self "). — And  the  books  were  opened ;  the 
books  of  record,  in  which  the  good  and  bad 
deeds  of  men  were  recorded,  that  they  may 
serve  as  a  basis  of  the  sentence  to  be  pronounced 
upon  men  by  God,  the  heavenly  judge.  Cf. 
Rev.  XX.  12,  as  weU  as  the  frequent  mention  of 
the  "  book  of  life  "  in  which  the  names  of  the 


burning  zeal  with  which  the  holy  God  not  only  pnnisheii 
and  destroys  sinners  but  also  purifies  and  renders  glorious 
His  own  peojile  :  see  on  Exod.  iii.  3." — Keit.} 

*  ("In  the  N.  T.  Christians  are  represented  as  sharing 
in  the  like  solemnities,  1  Cor.  vi.  2;  Matt.  xix.  28;  Luke 
xxii.  30  ;  Rev.  iii.  21.  Not  iniprobalily  such  expressions  as 
'  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image.'  •  Let  us  go  down  and  see.' 
'Who  will  go  for  us?'  take  their  plural  form  from  such 
views  of  the  heavenly  Coucesfms.  "The  sum  of  the  matter 
is  that  the  prophet  presents  the  Supreme  Lord  and  Judgl 
to  our  view  by  imagery  burr*  wed  from  earthly  soveieigna, 
i.e.,  as  htivmi:  all  the  insignia  of  [  re-eminence  and  si:preiU' 
acy  around  him." — Stuart.\ 


156 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


heii-s  of  celestial  glory,  who  have  been  reconciled 
to  God,  are  inserted, — in  Ex.  xxxii.  32  ;  Psa.  Ixix. 
29  ;  Isa.  iv.  8 ;  Dan.  xii  1  (see  on  that  passage) ; 
Luke  X.  20 ;  Phil.  iv.  3  ;  Eev.  iii.  5  ;  xx.  15 ; 
also  the  "  book  of  remembrance,"  in  which  God 
records  the  suflferings  of  His  faithful  servants, 
which  is  noticed  in  Psa.  Ivi.  9;  Mai.  iii.  16,  etc. 
— Verse  11.  I  beheld  then,  because  of  the 
voice  of  great  words  Tvhich  the  horn  spake — • 
I  beheld  even  till  the  beast  W£is  slain.  An 
anacoluthon,  in  the  second  r^]n  T^}T^  repeats 
the  first,  which  was  separated  from  111'*!?  by 
the  accent,  but  gives  a  somewhat  different  turn 
to  the  thought ;  cf .  the  similar  constructions  in 
Jer.  XX.  5 ;  Rev.  xii.  9  ;  1  Mace.  i.  1.  "'1  l?i 
' '  till  that, ' '  indicates  a  protracted  trial,  which 
ends  with  the  destruction  of  the  beast,  i.  e. ,  with 
the  judicial  execution  of  the  God-opposed  world- 
power.  The  little  horn,  representing  the  last 
anti- christian  king  of  the  fourth  monarchy,  who 
brings  ruin  upon  his  whole  empire  by  his  inso- 
lent rebellion  against  the  Most  High,  is  desig- 
nated as  the  cause  for  this  destruction. — And 
his  body  destroyed,  and  given  to  the  burning 
flame;  rather,  ''and  given  for  burning  to  the 
flame."  The  latter  of  these  expressions  illus- 
trates the  former ;  the  destroying  of  the  "  body  " 
of  the  beast,  i.  e. ,  of  the  entire  edifice  of  anti- 
christian  national  power,  is  effected  by  burning, 
which  burning  C'P.I  =  Heb.  npnia  in  Isa.  Ixiv. 
10)  is  of  course  to  be  taken  figuratively,  as  in 
Isa.  ix.  4  ;  Ixvi.  24;  Rev.  xix.  20;  xx.  10;  and 
the  fiery  nature  of  the  Divine  Judge  of  the 
world,  as  described  in  v.  9,  unquestionably 
stands  in  a  causal  relation  to  the  kindling  of 
this  devouring  fire  of  judgment ;  cf.  Isa.  x.  17; 
XXX.  27;  Zeph.  i.  18,  etc.— Verse  12.  The  rest 
of  the  beasts,  they  had  their  dominion  taken 
away ;  rather,  "  and  the  power  of  the  rest  of 
the  beasts  was  also  taken  away."  The  subjects 
of  T'^^'C  are  the  celestial  powers,  as  in  v.  5. 
Since  the  dominion  of  the  three  earlier  beasts 
was  destroyed  before  the  rise  of  the  fourth,  so 
far  at  least  as  it  was  a  dominion  over  the  world 
in  the  proper  sense,  and  since  it  does  not  seem 
admissible  to  take  1"'^™  in  the  sense  of  the 
pluperfect,  thus  explaining  the  passage  as  a 
mere  supplementary  note  (against  Ephraem, 
Polychron.,  Kamphausen,  C.  B.  Michaelis,  etc.), 
the  judgment  inflicted  on  the  "rest  of  the 
beasts  "  together  %vith  that  visited  on  the  fourth 
must  be  understood  to  signify  that  utter  destruc- 
tion of  the  henthen  world-poioers  which  subjects 
the  remnants  of  all  the  four  world-kingdoms  to 
Vie  new  all-embracing  Messianic  dominion,  and 
incorporates  them  in  its  realm  ;  for  as  the  char- 
acteristic expression  S^Hlin  "ISD,  "  the  rest  of 
the  beasts  "  (instead  of  ^-ins*  x?T^n  or  stnT^irbs 
mJiTp  "It  V.  7  b)  indicates,  certain  fragments 
or  remnants  of  the  three  former  world-kingdoms 
are  conceived  of  as  continuing  to  exist  beside 
the  fourth,  and  as  being  involved  in  its  destruc- 
tion. The  fall  of  the  three  earlier  world-king- 
doms is  not  regarded  as  complete  by  the  pro- 
phet, inasmuch  as  larger  or  smaller  portions  of 
them  continue  to  exist  beside  the  last— perhaps 
temporarily  incorporated  into  it  as  provinces, 
bat  not  on  that  account  assimilated  to  it — until 


the  Messianic  judgment  involves  them  in  a  com- 
mon destruction.  That  he  refers  only  to  such 
remnants,  and  not  to  Jiew  kingdoms  essentially 
distinct  from  the  former  world-monarchies  (an 
J.  D.  Michaelis,  Von  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  Ewald, 
etc.,  suppose),  is  evident  (1)  from  the  paraUel 
description  in  chap.  ii. ,  where  the  destruction 
of  the  four  constituent  parts  of  the  colossus  re- 
sults at  the  last  and  in  the  same  moment  through 
the  agency  of  the  stone  which  rolls  from  the 
mountain  (see  v.  34  et  seq. .  and  especiaUy  v. 
44)  ;  (2)  from  the  later  paraUel,  chap.  viii.  4, 
where  all  the  beasts  (ri^rrbS)  with  whom  the 
Persian  ram  contends,  are  likewise  only  the  con- 
stituent parts  into  which  the  latest  world -king- 
dom had  dissolved,  and  which  are  all  overthrown 
and  subjugated  by  the  new  dynasty  (see  on  that 
passage,  and  compare  Kranichfeld's  remarks  on 
this  place,  p.  265  et  seq.,  which  are  certainly 
correct). — Yet  their  lives  were  prolonged  for 
a  season  and  time ;  rather,  • '  for  the  duration 
of  their  life  was  fixed,  to  the  season  and  time." 
This  time  (T3T,  identical  with  S«;^T,  v.  22,  ac- 
cording to  the  correct  opinion  of  Von  Lengerke, 
Kranichfeld.  etc. )  has  come,  so  far  as  the  seer 
is  concerned,  with  the  judgment  of  the  fourth 
beast  and  of  the  remnants  of  the  other  beasts, 
which  has  just  been  described.  The  duration 
of  their  Uves  (V.'??  **?""*,  properly  "respite, 
prolongation  of  life  ")  finds  its  unalterable  ter- 
minux  ad  quern  in  this  period  of  Jlessianic  judg- 
ment, beyond  which,  indeed,  the  various  nations 
(v.  14)  continue  to  exist,  but  not  the  heathen 
world  powers  formerly  composed  of  them.  Con- 
cerning yrs^  yaX  (-  Heb.  n::iai  n?)  .see  on 
chap.  ii.  21. 

Verses  13,  14.  The  erection  of  Missiafi's  king- 
dom.  I  sa\7  in  the  night  visions,  and  behold  ; 
again  a  solemn  and  circumstantial  introduction, 
like  that  preceding  the  description  of  the  fourth 
beast  in  v.  7.  Cf.  the  minuteness  with  which 
the  prophet  dwelt  on  the  description  of  the 
fourth  world-power,  and  of  the  Messianic  judg- 
ment which  came  upon  it,  in  chap.  ii.  40  et  seq. 
— (One)  like  the  Son  of  man  came  writh  the 
clouds  of  heaven  j  literally,  " '  with  the  clouds 
of  heaven  (one)  coming  like  a  Son  of  man  "  (""^ 
Sin).  The  subject  is  omitted,  and  must  be  .-en- 
dered  indefinitely  by  "  one,"  as  in  chap.  viii.  15  ; 
X.  16,  18.  ^^With  the  clouds  of  heaven,"  i.e., 
together  with  them  (Rev.  i.  7),  and  therefore  in 
thfera  (Mark  xiii.  26)  or  upon  them,  iiri  -ruv 
rfi/jfXwi' (Matt.  xxiv.  30;  xxvi.  64;  Rev.  xi v.  14). 
As  the  Messiah  here  comes  to  God  upon  the  clouds 
of  heaven  and  stands  before  Him,  so  God  Him- 
self rides,  in  poetical  and  prophetic  descriptions 
elsewhere,  upon  the  clouds  as  His  celestial 
chariot,  cf.  Psa.  civ.  3  ;  Jer.  iv.  13  ;  also  Psa. 
xvui.  10-18;  xcvii.  2-4;  Nah.  i.  3  et  seq.  ;  Isa 
xix.  1  (cf.  Isa.  xiv.  14). — '.^"JS*  ^3,  "son  of  a 
man,  son  of  man."  is  a  simple  circumlocution 
to  express  the  idea  "  man,"  which  is  found  also 
in  the  Syr.  and  the  Targums ;  and  therefore  = 
the  Heb.  D13St  or  tj-is,  for  which  the  Heb.  also 
occasionally  substitutes  aiS'l?  or  ci:!«."l|  (see 
Psa.  viii.  5  ;  cxiiv.  3  ;  and  infra,  chap.  viii.  17  ; 
X.  16,  18).    This  combination  serves  to  specially 


CHAP.  VII.  1-38. 


15T 


point  out  an  organic  connection  with  or  mem- 
bership in  the  human  race.  The  personage 
whom  Daniel  saw  coming  with  the  clouds  of 
heaven  had  the  appearance,  therefore,  of  being 
one  of  the  human  race — a  man.  The  mention 
of  the  human  appearance  of  the  apparition  cer- 
tainly does  not  aim  at  contrasting  it  with  the 
forms  of  the  beasts  before  described  (as  Hof 
mann  supposes,  Weissngung  uitd  ErfuUiing.  I. 
290) ;  for  these  have  passed  from  the  prophet's 
vision  in  consequence  of  their  destruction,  which 
has  already  transpired  (vs.  11,  12).  The  com- 
parison with  the  human  iform  of  Him  who  comes 
^vith  the  clouds,  which,  although  not  expressed, 
is  certainly  implied,  is  to  be  found  in  the  super- 
humau — hence  the  Dieine.  or  at  least  angelic — 
form,  which  the  seer  would  naturally  expect,  to 
behold  in  these  exalted  scenes  (see  Ewald  on  this 
passage).  That  he  should  observe  a  form  simi- 
lar to  that  of  man,  shining  through  the  clouds, 
instead  of  a  terrifying  apparition  that  blinds  and 
confuses  his  senses,  produces  on  him  an  impres- 
sion of  wonder,  but  also  of  pleasure.  Cf .  Kran- 
ichfeld  :  "  The  case  here  is  different  from  that 
of  chap,  iii.  25,  where  only  ordinary  men  might 
be  looked  for  in  the  fiery  furnace,  so  that  he 
who  became  the  associate  of  the  three  Jews  was 
at  first  regarded  merely  as  partaking  of  /lumnn 
nature,  and  a  comparison  with  merely  human 
traits  was  necessary  to  lead  the  judgment  to 
express  the  stronger  utterance  P^r^  "^??i  ^vith- 

out  thereby  denying  the  human  appearance  of 
the  form.  And  as  the  judgment  in  iii.  25  rests 
in  the  couolusion  that  the  personage  in  question 
belongs  to  the  race  of  gods,  although  present  in 
human  form,  so  it  here  concludes  that  the  object 
of  notice  is  one  belonging  to  the  hinnnn  race,  but 
wearing  the  form  of  God."  The  prophet,  how- 
ever, holds  fast  to  the  distinction  between  a 
wholly  human  appearance  and  the  vision  he  has 
seen,  and  indicates  this  by  the  particle  of  com- 
parison 3,  which  points  out  that  he  Intends  to 
represent  a  reJiUt/  supernatural,  but  still  human- 
like personage.  (The  correspondence  with  the 
3  in  vs.  -1  and  0,  does  not  militate  against  this 
conception  of  the  3  here — despite  the  assertion 
to  the  contrary  by  Richno,  in  the  Stud.  u.  Kritt. , 
1889,  II. ,  p.  255. )  There  cannot  be  the  slightest 
doubt,  in  view  of  the  entire  description,  particu- 
larly in  V.  14,  and  also  in  view  of  the  exactly  cor- 
responding signification  of  the  destroying  stone, 
in  the  parallel  vision  of  the  2d  chapter  (see  ii,  44 
et  seq. ),  that  this  superhuman  form  of  a  man  re- 
presents the  Messiah,  the  Divine-human  founder 
of  that  fiith  world-kingdom,  which  is  at  the  s.ame 
time  a  heavenly  kingdom  of  eternal  duration. 
The  effort  of  Hitzig  to  refer  the  ~';\\  ""^S  to  the 
people  of  Israel  as  the  "personified  community 
of  saints,  which  rules  over  the  heathen,"  is 
merely  the  product  of  a  persistent  and  funda- 
mental aversion  to  the  idea  of  a  personal  Mes- 
siah, which  results  naturally  from  the  extreme 
rationalistic  position  of  that  exegete.  The  in- 
terpretation which  asserts  a  personal  Jlessiah  is 
advocated  by  nearly  all  expositors  (with  the 
exception  of  Ibn-Ezra,  Jahn,  Paulu.s,  Baumgar- 
ten-Crusius,  and  Hofmann,  who  agree  with  Hit- 
zig, but,  in  part,  for  very  different  reasons,  and 
ijving  a  more  positive  turn  to  the  subject),  and 


is  removed  beyond  the  region  of  doubt,  (1)  by 
vs.  18  and  21  of  this  chapter,  in  which  an  unbi 
assed  exegesis  is  compelled  to  find  the  people  of 
Israel  clearly  distinguished  from  the  Son  of  man 
(see  on  v.  18) ;   (2)  by  the  undeniable  reference 
of  vib<:  Tov  ai'i^puToi',  the  pre-eminently  favorite 
Messianic  designation  of   Himself   employed  by 
the  Saviour,  to  this  passage  (Matt.  viii.  20,  etc.  ; 
John  xii.  84)  ;  (3)  by  important  testimonies  of 
the  Jewish-Hellenistic  literature,  such  as  Enoch 
(xlvi.  1-3 ;  xlviii.  2  et  seq.  ;  Ixii.  7.  9,  14  ;  Ixiii. 
11  ;  Ixix,  27.— Cf,  Hilgenfeld,  Jiidische  Apoka- 
li/ptik.  p.  155  et  seq.),  Orac.  Sibi/U.  (Ill,,  286  et 
seq,,   653   et   seq.,  ed.    Friedlieb;    cf.    Ziindel, 
Kritische  Untersuchungen,  p.  163  et  seq.)  ;  *  (4) 
by  most  of  the  rabbins  {e.g. ,  R.  Joshua  in  Ibn- 
Ezra,  Saadia,  Rashi,  Ibn-Jahja,  etc.),  who  fre- 
quently designate  the  Messiah  simply  as  "'j;?. 
"the  beclouded  one."     Cf.  the  Eth. -fund,  prin- 
ciples, etc.,  No.  4. — And  came  to  the  Ancient 
of  days  j  i.e.,  he  was  admitted  to  the  immedi- 
ate presence   of  God   (cf.   Ezek.   xlii.    13),  con- 
ducted before  Him  until  he  wag  placed  as  near 
as  were  the  elders  who  sat  on  the  right  and  left, 
and  even  still  nearer. — And  they  brought  him 
near   before    him.      The    subject  of  "ri^S^prt 
is  probably  not  "the  clouds,"  but   rather  thy 
ministering  angels,  v.  10.     Thus  Hitzig.  Ewald, 
etc.,  correctly  hold,  in  opposition  to  Kranich- 
feld,  who  construes  the  clouds  as  the  subject, 
and  to  several  others,  as  Kamphausen,  etc. ,  who 
prefer  to  leave  the  subject  wholly  imdesignated, 
as  with  Ti'iyn,  v.  13.— That  the  Messiah   was 
required  to  be  brought  before  God  and  be  pre- 
sented to  Him  at  this  juncture,  indicates  that 
the  prophet  regards  him  as  having  previously 
existed  while  the  beasts  exercised  their  domin- 
ion— and  therefore  that  he  ascribes  personal  pre- 
existence  to  him.     Daniel  probably  conceived  of 
him  as  pre-existing  among  the   thousands  and 
tens  of  thousands  of  the  saints  of  God,  and  as 
subduing  and  crushing  the  God-opposed  world- 
powers  at  their  head  (vs.  11,  12) ;'  for  only  thus 
can  be  explained  the  investmg  of  the  Messiah 
with  eternal  dominion  over  the  kingdom  of  God, 
which  is  evidently  a  reward  for  his  valiant  bat- 
tling in  the  service  of  the  Most  High,  as  de- 
scribed in  the  next  verse  ;  cf.  also  the  parallel 
description  in  chap.   ii.   44   et  seq. — Verse   14. 
And  there  was  given  him  dominion  and  glory, 
and  a  kingdom,    instead  of  ^n"!  Syrus  and  the 
Vulgate  read  ^n' — "and  He  (the   Ancient  of 
days)  gave  him,"  etc.  ;  likewise  Luther  in  this 
place  and  the  parallel  v.  32,  where  also  the  Sept. 
and  Theodot.   interpret  ^!^^..     In  the  latter  in- 
stance the  active  sense  would    certainly  seem 
preferable,  since  the  "Ancient  of  da,vs  "  imme- 
diately precedes  a  different  verb  in  the  3d  sing, 
active  as  its  subject ;   here,  however,  this  subject 
is  too   distant,  and  the  analogy  of  vs,  4  and  6 
recommends  the  passive  form  3"'~";.— The  triad 
"  dominion,  glory,  and  kingdom  "  recalls'  chap, 
iii.  33 ;  iv.  31  ;  vi.   22,  where  at  least  "  domin- 
ion "  (I^Vf)  and  "kingdom"  (l^itt)  are  given. 

'  Cf.  nlsn  .«/.?//;.,  1.  II.,  p.  277,  el.  Gallanrt  :  ^f«  iv  yt<t,iXj, 
irpb^  aitydtTov  aif>dtTOi  auTos  iv  io(jj  ;(;ptcrT6s  (n-c  afAV/ionv 
ayytKriifHTi  Kai  Kadiaet,  ktA. 


I5s 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Ujion  it  is  based  the  ancient  doxology  at  the 
close  of  the  Lord's  prayer  :  aov  ;  ap  //  .iiiatViia  am 
tj  iSthiih;  t<a}  t]  du;a  sir  rolr  a'i(jva<.  —  And  all 
people  ....  should  serve  ("served")  him. 
Concerning  the  triad  "  peoples,  tribes,  and 
tongues  "  see  on  chap.  iii.  4.  Von  Leugerke  and 
Ewald  regard  T"??"!  as  future,  '"  shall  serve 
him,"  but  thereby  assume  a  rather  harsh  change 
of  tense  in  ihe  midst  of  the  remarks  which  de- 
scribe the  objects  seen  in  the  vision.  Hitzig, 
Kranichfeld.  etc.,  are  correct  in  considering  the 
verb  as  logically  dependent  on  the  preceding 
principal  verb  2"'n',  thus  expressing  design — ■ 
•'in  order  that."  or,  "so  that  all  people,  etc., 
should  serve  him."  nit:  i°  itself  is  certainly 
not  to  be  limited  to  signify  rfligious  service 
iDivine  adoration,  cnltus),  for  in  the  extra-Bib- 
Ucal  Chaldee,  e.y.,  in  the  Targums.  it  signifies 
iilso  a  purely  secular  service,  and  in  v.  27  of 
this  chapter  it  is  synonymous  with  ^r'lr™!*'  "  to 
obey;  "  but  in  point  of  fact  it  serves,  both  here 
iind  in  that  passage,  to  designate  service  ren- 
dered to  a  Divine  person,  which  is  also  its  bear- 
ing in  chap.  iii.  12  et  seq. — His  dominion  is  an 
everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  be  de- 
stroyed. Cf.  chap.  iii.  S3;  iv.  31  ;  vi.  27;  also 
Mic.  iv.  7;  Luke  i.  33;  Rev.  xi.  1.5;  six.  10, 
etc. 

Verses  15-18.  Tlie  interpretation  of  the  vinon. 
ill  general,  without  special  reference  to  the  fourth 
hewtt.  The  impression  of  alarm  produced  on 
Daniel  by  what  he  saw,  led  him  to  seek  a  fur- 
ther explanation  of  its  meaning.  He  therefore 
mingles  with  the  host  that  surrounds  the  .\ncient 
of  days,  after  having  hitherto  remained  apart  as 
a  mere  observer.  A  second  act  in  the  drama  of 
the  dream-vision,  in  which  the  prophet  himself 
takes  part,  though  merely  as  an  inquirer,  begins 
therefore  at  this  point.  Von  Lengerke  arbitra- 
rily remarks:  "  The  vision  is  now  over  iwith  v. 
14) ;  but  the  seer  remains  on  the  heavenly  scene, 
and  requests  an  angel  to  interpret  the  dream." 
That  this  is  incorrect,  appears  from  v.  16,  where 
the  ministering  ho.sts  of  angels  mentioned  in  v. 
10  still  appear,  while  on  that  assumption  they 
must  have  disappeared  with  all  the  other  fea- 
tures of  the  vision  ;  and  the  character  of  what 
follows,  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  does  not  in- 
dicate that  it  is  a  mere  interpretation  as  distin- 
guished from  the  preceding  dream. — I,  Daniel, 
■WAS  grieved  in  my  spirit  in  the  midst  of  my 
body;  properly,  "within  in  the  sheath"  (^32 
ri:"];),  ;.«.,  in  the  body,  which  contains  the 
spirit,  as  the  sword  is  contained  in  its  scabb.ard  ; 
cf.  Job  xxvii.  8;  PUny,  U.  N.,  Vll.,  .53.  Ewald 
well  remarks  that  " '  as  the  sword  remains  at  rest 
as  long  as  it  is  in  its  sheath,  so  the  spirit  of  man 
is  generally  quiet  while  it  feels  itself  enclosed 
by  the  coarse  veU  of  the  body ;  but  there  are 
still  moments  in  which  the  spirit  becomes  rest- 
less while  in  its  coarse  tenement,  and  when  it 
would  break  forth  impatiently  aud  venture  all." 
etc.  In  relation  to  ** "  2  ( properly  ' "  to  abbrevi- 
ate, contr.act,  torrjvere")  as  designating  an  unu- 
sually bitt«r  grief,  cf.  the  coiTesponding  Syr. 
and  Arab,  verb.s.  The  feature  that  plunges  the 
prophet  into  so  severe  and  bitter  sorrow  is  not 
w)  much  the  circumst.ince  that  he  is  unacquaint- 
ed with  the  special  meaning  of  the  vision,  as  that 
a  majority  of  its  features,  and  particularly  the 


four  beiists  and  the  dreadful  fate  imposed  o; 
them,  were  so  prophetic  of  evil  and  misfortune. 
The  end,  indeed,  toward  which  everything  was 
tending,  according  to  vs.  13  and  14.  was  glori- 
ous, but  the  way  by  which  to  reach  it  was  i)ain- 
ful.  and  opened  a  prospect  of  severe  conflicts 
for  the  people  of  God  ;  and  the  prophet  must 
have  suspected  this,  even  before  it  was  explained 
to  him  in  detail.  —  **;?*,  in  the  combination 
S<:x  "'H^"',  is  not  the  nominat.  absol. ,  as  Ber. 
tholdt  supposed,  but  is  in  apposition  to  the  suf- 
fix in  ■'v^"  ;  cf.  viii.  1,  15;  Ezra  vii.  21  ;  also 
Winer,  §  40,  4,  and  concerning  the  correspond- 
ing construction  in  the  Hebrew,  see  Gesenius, 
Li'hrgeb..  p.  72y.  The  solemn  emphasis  which 
the  prophet's  language  gains  by  this  apposition- 
al  supplement,  corresponds  to  the  import.ance  of 
his  \nsion  ;  cf.  chap.  x.  1,  7;  xii.  5. — Verse  l(i. 
I  came  near  unto  one  of  them  that  stood  by, 
i.e.,  one  of  those  engaged  in  His  service,  who 
stood  about  God. — And  asked  him  the  truth 
(or  "  the  true  explanation  ")  of  all  this  ;  'Sf  ^i^^ 
properly  "the  firm,  or  certain;"  here  used  of 
the  trustworthy  interpretation,  conforming  to 
the  designs  of  God.  for  which  Daniel  asks. 
Kranichfeld  interpolates:  "He  desires  that 
nothing  should  be  concealed  because  of  a  desire 
to  spaie  the  inquirer  in  his  excited  state." 
This  additional  idea  of  laying  aside  reserve,  of 
disregarding  considerations  of  pity,  is  not  con- 
j  tained  in  the  simple  S^f  "7^'^. — And  he  told  me, 
I  and  made  me  know  the  interpretation  of  the 
]  things  (or  "words"),  viz.  :  in  the  remarks 
which  foUow  (vs.  17,  Iti).  The  clause  "and 
'  made  me  to  know  "  is  therefore  epexegetical  to 
"  and  he  told  me  ;  "  the  ;]  before  ~rr  is  expli- 
cative, as  in  v.  1  a.  Von  Lengerke  and  Kran- 
ichfeld unnecessarily  take  ■'::?-in'^  in  the  telic 
sense,  "  He  told  me  that  he  would  make  me  to 
know,"  etc.  The  reason  for  such  a  proinine  to 
reveal  the  interpretation  is  not  discoverable, 
since  the  interpretation  itself  immediately  fol- 
I  lows.  — Verse  17.  These  (exceedingly)  great 
I  beasts,  which  are  four — four  kings — shaU 
arise,  etc.  With  reference  to  the  clause  in  the 
nom.  absol.,  "these  exceedingly  great  beasts, 
which  are  four"  (or,  "  With  reference  to  these 
....  beacts.  concerning  them."  etc.).  cf.  vs. 
23,  24.  .and  also  Isa.  xUx.  49. —The  f  ur  kings 
(I'tJ;":)  whom  the  beasts  are  here  said  to  de- 
note, are  unquestionably  not  regarded  as  four 
individuals,  but  as  the  represenlriticts  of  four 
kingdoms,  as  appears  from  vs.  23.  24  (where  the 
fourth  beast  is  represented  as  a  '-',"  governed 
by  a  numerous  succession  of  individual  kings). 
Cf.  the  identifying  of  l-b^p  and  "^  which 
appears  alre.ady  in  chap.  ii.  37  (as  well  as  supra, 
V.  4)  in  the  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  again 
in  chap.  viii.  21  et  seq.  ;  xi.  2.— The  •■  arising 
of  the  kings  will  be  i*'"?**  1^,  i.e.,  not  '-out  of 
the  earth,"  but  "  from  the  surface  of  the  earth," 
hence,  in  effect,  "on  earth"  (Luther). — In  ihe 
later  Heb.  parallels,  viii.  22,  2:;  ;  xi.  2.  3  et  se  1. , 
zr,~  is  rendered  by  T?<.  The  future  l"":"""! 
denotes  the  Divine  decree,  which  limits  the 
duration  of   the  dominion  of  kings,  as  wjll  a; 


CHAP.  VII.  1-28. 


15£ 


tppoints  their  rise.     Instead  of   " '  They  shall 

arise,"  ""5^P"1  may  therefore  be  rendered  mod- 
ally,  "They  shall  be  compelled  to  arise."  If 
the  purely  future  sense  be  retained,  it  will  be 
necessary  to  assume,  with  Von  Lengerke,  Kamp- 
hausen,  etc.,  that  the  prophet  carelessly,  or  by 
virtue  of  a  denmaiitatio  a  potiori,  included  the 
actually  existing,  and  even  partially  superseded 
Babylonian  world-kingdom  among  the  future 
ones  of  his  vision.  This  view  is,  however,  more 
eligible  than  the  strange  assumption  of  Hitzig 
that  the  author  does  not  in  this  connection  re- 
gard the  Chaldfean  empire  as  the  first  of  the 
coming  monarchies,  but  assigns  that  position  to 
the  reign  of  Belshazzar  merely,  which  opened 
shortly  after  the  time  of  this  vision ;  as  if  v.  1 
did  not  expressly  specify  "  the  first  year  of  Bel- 
shazzar"  as  the  time  of  recording  the  vision, 
and  as  if  it  were  at  all  certain  that  the  author 
really  regarded  Belshazzar  as  the  last  Chaldcean 
king !  Moreover,  how  can  it  be  reconciled,  that 
whUe  formerly  (chap.  ii.  37)  Xebuchsidnezzar 
was  selected  as  the  representative  of  the  Chal- 
dsean  monarchy,  and  this  was  to  a  certain  extent 
repeated  at  the  commencement  of  the  present 
\'isiou  (see  v.  4).  the  unimportant,  listle.ss,  idle 
Belshazzar  should  here  suddenly  be  installed  in 
his  place? — Verse  IS.  But  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High  shall  take  (•  receive  ")  the  king- 
dom. The  plural  "i";t;>,  which  occurs  here 
aild  in  vs.  32,  35.  and  27,  serves,  like  "^^5  in  the 
Targums,  as  a  phiraiis  exceUeiitke,  to  denote  the 
God  of  Israel,  who  in  Gen.  xiv.  18  is  called  -!< 
^^''i>.  As  similar  plurals  of  excellence,  of.  not 
merely  D^n'is,  but  also  5■'■-^^p,  Josh.  xxiv. 
19;  Hos.  xii.  1;  Prov.  ix.  10;  xxx.  3.-- -The 
"saints  of  the  Most  High,"  or  the  "saints" 
simply  (T'?'''1P),  as  they  are  called  in  vs.  21 
and  33,  are  not  the  angels,  mentioned  in  vs.  10 
and  lU,  who  surround  the  throne  of  God,  but 
the  people  of  God  on  the  earth,  the  '"  real  mem- 
bers in  the  communion  of  the  perfectly  true 
religion  "  (Ewald),  the  members  of  the  house  of 
Israel  in  its  ideal  spiritual  signification  (Gal.  vi. 
10;,  the  Israel  of  the  Jlessianic  time  of  fulfil- 
ment ;  cf.  Isa.  iv.  3  ;  vi.  13 ;  Ixii.  13  ;  Rom.  ix. 
G,  etc. — The  same  expression  is  also  found  in 
vs.   22   and  25  ;  cf.   C-Tip'CJ",  chap,  viii   34, 

and  -~p~~,  chap.  xii.  7  (also  Ex.  xix.  6 ; 
Deut.  vii.  G;  xiv.  21 ;  Psa.  xvi.  3;  xxxiv.  10). — 
When  it  is  said  that  these  saints  of  the  Most 
High  "  shall  receive  tte  kingdom,"  the  reference 
is  evidently  to  the  transmission  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom  into  the  hands  of  the  Son  of  man  from 
the  Ancient  of  days,  as  described  in  v.  14.  The 
saints,  however,  are  bv  no  "means  to  be  regarded 
as  identical  with  the  Son  of  man,  so  as  to  make 
him  a  mere  personification  of  the  people  of 
Israel.  This  view,  which,  besides  being  advo- 
cated by  Hitzig  and  Hofraaun  (see  supra,  on  v. 
13),  is  adopted  by  Herzfeld  in  his  Ueschichti 
Isi-neU.  II.,  381,  is  opposed  by  v.  21,  where  the 
saints  are  represented  as  a  host  of  battling  per- 
sons, and  are  clearly  distinguished  from  the 
Mes.siah,  who  is  exalted  far  above  them,  and  at 
the  time  of  their  conflict  with  the  anti-christ 
tarries  in  heaven   with  the  Ancient  of  days — 


I  hence  the  relation  between  the  Messiah  and 
the  Messianic  people  is  represented  to  be 
such  that  he  aid."  them  in  heaven  and  from 
heaven  (strengthening,  comforting,  and  support- 
ing them  in  their  conflicts  and  sufferings),  .and 
for  that  reason,  as  their  representative,  receives 
for  them  the  dominion  over  the  eternal  kingdom 
from  the  hand  of  God,  as  was  already  indicated 
in  the  vision,  v.  14.  Cf.  Auberlen.  p.  51 ;  alst 
Von  Lengerke,  Kranichfeld,  and  Ewald  on  this 
passage.  The  latter  correctly  observes,  p.  406  : 
"  If  the  language  in  this  place  and  in  vs.  23  and 
37  refers  at  once  to  the  genuine  members  of 
Messiah's  kingdom  instead  of  Himself,  this  is 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  more  fully  explaining 
the  great  picture  which  has  been  given  once  for 
all.  A  kingdom  and  its  sovereign  cannot  exist 
without  subjects,  and  in  fact,   they  only  exist 

through  the  latter When  such  a  people 

has  really  been  found,  it  receives  the  power  and 
perpetuity,  the  indestructible  and  eternal  char- 
acter, as  well  as  the  dignity  and  the  pre-emi- 
nence which  lie  in  the  nature  of  that  empire  and 
its  Messiah  (cf.  ii.  44).  The  language  of  this 
interijretation  refers  therefore  to  this  pe&ple.  and 
the  subject  of  the  vision  in  v.  13  et  seq.  derives 
therefrom  a  self-evident  but  not  unimportant 
completion.  This  by  no  means  implies,  how- 
ever, that  the  Me.ssiah,  who  was  already  suffi- 
ciently characterized  in  that  passage,  is  identical 
with  the  people  who  are  now,  at  the  final  stage, 
included,  any  more  than  that  the  description  of 
the  Messiah  in  that  place,  whose  majestic  char- 
acter is  not  easily  repeated,  has  any  analogy 
with  the  words  here  employed.  The  king  and 
his  people  are  associated  only  in  the  final  results 
and  end,  in  the  etemitj'  and  glory  of  the  king- 
dom itself,  as  is  strikingly  remarked  in  this  pas- 
sage and  in  v.  37 ;  and  yet  even  here  the  dis- 
tinction is  clearly  observed  that  the  three  things, 
'  authority,  glory,  and  dominion,'  i.e.,  majesty 
in  its  full  activity  and  glorious  recognition,  are 
in  V.  14  awarded  only  to  the  Messiah,  and  not  to 
his  people."  Cf.  also  the  same  author's  Jiihr- 
biicher  iter  blblMcheii  WUtenxchaft,  vol.  III.,  p. 
331  et  seq. — And  possess  the  kingdom  for 
ever,  etc.  "cnsi  "to  possess,"  here  denotes 
the  continued  possession,  while  in  v.  33  it  is  in- 
ceptive, and  signifies  the  assumption  of  the  pos- 
session, or  the  entrance  upon  it.  The  superla- 
tive expression  '<'^"?i>  Di>  15,  "  unto  the 
eternity  of  eternities,  unto  all  eternities,"  is 
exactly  like  the  Hebrew  ^?  ^733'IJ""!?',  Isa. 
xiv  17;  cf.  1  Tim.  i.  17 ;  Eph.  iii.  31,  etc. 

Verses  19-22.  Daniel  desires  a  ce^jtain  explana- 
tion of  the  FOURTH  BEAST.  He  therefore 
briefly  recapitulates  the  former  description  of 
its  appearance  and  fate  in  vs.  7-14.  In  this 
recapitulation,  which  recalls  to  mind  the  similar 
ones  in  chap.  ii.  45  (cf.  v.  34).  and  especially  in 
chap.  iv.  17  et  seq.  (cf.  v,  7  et  seq.),  we  have 
the  new  features  that  cliiws  of  brass  are  noticed 
in  addition  to  its  iron  teeth  (v.  19),  and  tliat  the 
people  of  God  are  mentioned  as  warring  against 
the  beast  (aided  by  the  Messiah,  and  under  his 
protection)  and  overcoming  it. — Then  I  would 
know  the  truth   of  the  fourth  beast.    ."■22 


-?  '*7^-?,  I  desired  to  be  certain  about  this, 
fs'/rouv  aiipi^Sur  ^tpi  (Theodot.).      The   reading 


160 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


SZil";,  iDstead  of  S<:2^2,  which  is  found  in 
three  MSS.  at  Erfurth,  probably  owes  its  origin 
to  the  defective  form,  which  in  this  place,  unlike 
T.  It),  seemed  to  indicate  an  Inf.  Pael  (which, 
however,  is  found  in  no  other  place).  The  ren- 
dering in  the  Vulgate  :  "  Post  Iwc  rdui  diligenter 
diseeve"  may  also  have  contributed  to  originate 
that  reading. — Whose  teeth  were  of  iron  and 
its  nails  of  brass.  The  brazen  claws  are  asso- 
ciated with  the  iron  teeth,  by  virtue  of  the 
association  of  ideas,  which  frequently  connects 
iron  and  brass  in  thought ;  see  e.g.,  Deut.  xxxiii. 
25;  Jer.  xv.  12;  Isa.  xlv.  2;  Psa.  cvii.  16,  etc. 
— Verse  20.  And  the  other  which  came  up, 
and  before  whom  three  fell.  Literally,  "and 
they  fell  before  him  the  three."  The  relative 
construction  is  dropped  at  this  point,  as  well  as 
the  connection  of  the  speech  from  b^l,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  30th  verse,  so  that  the 
discourse  again  assumes  the  character  of  de- 
scription, especially  from  the  beginning  of 
the  21st  verse. — And  (of)  that  horn  that 
had  eyes  j  properly,  "and  that  horn,  aud 
it  had  eyes,"  etc.  The  1  before  V?'??  is  epexe- 
getical  or  correlative,  as  in  Isa.  xliv.  12;  Psa. 
Ixxvi.  7. — The  form  b^^S  with  _  occurs  also 
in  V.  25  and  chap.  vi.  23. — Whose  look  was 
more  stout  than  his  fellows,  rimnn  Ip,  a 
shortened  expression  for  H  ITn  ^2  ;  cf.  chap. 
I  10  ;  iv.  13,  30.— Verse  21.  I  beheld,  and  the 
same  horn  made  war  with  the  saints,  etc. 
This  war  against  the  saints  merely  indicates  a 
.special  feature  connected  with  the  "  devouring, 
breaking  in  pieces,  and  stamping  under  foot" 
(v.  19),  of  which  the  beast  was  guilty,  but  pre- 
cisely thut  feature  which  would  especially  arouse 
the  attention  and  fears  of  the  prophet.  So  far  as 
the  mode  of  expression  is  concerned,  the  writer 
here  passes  from  figurative  to  literal  language ; 
cf.  Rev.  xi.  7;  xiii.  7;  xix.  19. — Verse  22.  Until 
....  judgment  was  given  to  the  saints  of  the 
Most  High;  i.e..,  "until  justice  was  done  to 
them."  ''P"  here  signifies  justice  to  be  secured 
by  law,  equivalent  to  the  Heb.  DBO'3,  e.g., 
Deut.  X.  18  ;  cf.  Psa.  cxl.  13.  It  cannot  here  be 
taken  in  the  sense  of  judging  or  performing  ju- 
dicial functions  ;  for  according  to  vs.  9,  10,  it  is 
God,  with  whom  are  associated  the  elders  of 
heaven,  who  sits  in  judgment  and  administers 
justice  (cf.  Psa.  ix.  T)).  There  is  no  design  here  to 
assign  a  participation  in  this  judicial  administra- 
tion of  the  Almighty  to  the  saints  (thus  differ- 
ing from  Matt.  xix.  'iA  ;  1  Cor.  vi.  2).— Instead 
of  •'  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,"  the  original 
has  "saints  of  the  Most  High,"  without  the  ar- 
ticle, which  is  also  the  case  in  the  latter  half  of 
the  verse,  and  in  v.  21.  Concerning  the  omis- 
sion of  the  article  in  solemn  and  poetic  speech, 
cf.  Ewald,  Lehrb.,  §  277  4,  where  Mic.  vii.  11  et 
seq.  ;  Isa.  xiv.  33;  Hab.  iu.  16;  Psa.  Ivi.  11, 
etc..  are  adduced  as  illustrations  of  the  Hebrew 
usage. 

Verses  33-37.  The  explnnation  of  the  angel  re- 
iperting  the  fourth  beast  and  its  judgment.  The 
fourth  beast  shall  be  the  fourth  kingdom; 
rather,  "the  fourth  beast,  a  fourth  kingdom 
ihall  be,"  etc.  The  same  construction  as  in  v. 
17  o,  and  as  in  v.  24,— And  shall  devour  the 


whole  earth.  The  emphasis  does  not  fall  oc 
"the  whole  earth,"  but  on  "shall  devour" 
(.i3S«ri),  which  is  not  only  placed  first,  but  is 
also  repeated  by  two  synonymous  terms  follow- 
ing the  object.  ''?"1?*  3?  does  not,  therefore, 
as  Hitzig  supposes,  signify  ' '  all  the  countries  of 
the  earth,"  for  this  would  result  in  an  unneces- 
sary exaggeration  of  the  hyperbole  which,  with- 
out question,  really  exists.  Nor  does  the  related 
i;s<  signify  "  to  swallow  up,"  which  would  be 
equivalent  to  "  appropriating,  or  incorporating 
with  itself "  (as  Hitzig  asserts,  appealing  for 
proof  to  Dent.  vii.  16;  Isa.  ix.  11  ;  Jer.  x.  25 — 
which  passages  are,  however,  by  no  means  con- 
vincing), but  only  "  to  devour,"  which,  like  the 
synonyms  "to  break"  and  "to  stamp"  {,~rfT\ 
and  P^.U)]  indicates  merely  a  devastating  and 
destructive  energy,  without  including  the  idea 
of  conquering.  The  fourth  world-kingdom, 
therefore,  may  be  held  to  signify  the  empire  of 
the  Seleucidae,  in  the  light  of  this  passage  also ; 
and  there  is  no  necessity  to  refer  it  to  the  Mace- 
donian empire  of  Alexander,  nor  yet  to  that  of 
the  Romans. — Verse  34.  And  the  ten  horns  out 
of  this  kingdom  are  ten  kings  that  shall  arise  ; 
rather,  "  And  the  ten  horns  ;  out  of  this  king- 
dom shall  arise  ten  kings."  nri13r^  Hi?:,  liter- 
ally, "out  of  this,  the  kingdom,"  i.e.,  out  of 
this  same  kingdom  ;  cf.  on  chap.  iii.  6.  Con- 
cerning the  form  nri^ril'p,  for  8*i;1~i'?,  see  on 
chap.  ii.  7.  Hitzig  prefers,  needlessly,  to  sub- 
stitute the  ending  n_,  and  refers  the  resulting 
' '  out  of  it,  hi^  kingdom  "  to  the  fourth  beast, 
or  even  to  the  "other  one"  (antichrist)  who 
is  afterivard  mentioned,  as  its  subject — which 
clearly  is  forced  and  arbitrary.  Hengstenberg 
(p.  311  et  seq.)  attempts,  contrary  to  the  sense 
of  the  prophet,  to  make  the  "  ten  horns  "  repre- 
sent ten  kingdoms,  i.e.,  ten  Christian  German 
states  which  are  developed  out  of  the  Roman 
world-empire.  Bleek  (Jahrb.  fiir  deutsche  Theol. , 
1860,  I.  p.  68)  also  inclines  to  this  transforma- 
tion of  the  "kings"  into  kingdoms,  since  he  at- 
tempts to  apply  the  fourth  beast  as  a  whole  to 
the  Macedonian-Hellenistic  world-monarchy,  the 
ten  horns  to  the  several  kingdoms  of  the  Dia- 
dochi  which  sprang  from  the  former,  and  the 
eleventh  horn  directly  to  the  dominion  of  the 
Seleucidae,  and  at  the  same  time  to  its  charac- 
teristic leading  representative,  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes.  Since  the  ten  horns  correspond  to  the 
partly  iron  and  partly  clay  toes  of  the  colossus 
in  chap.  ii.  41  et  seq.,*  the  assumption  that 
"kings"  are  here  really  put  for  "kingdoms" 
might  seem  admissible ;  but  in  paralleUzing  the 
toes  of  the  image  with  the  horns  of  the  beast, 
the  prophet  would  hardly  think  of  individual 
rulers,  any  more  than  of  distinct  states  or  king- 
doms (see  on  ii.  43).  A  horn,  as  Hitzig  justly 
observes,  would  not  be  especially  appropriate  as 
the  symbol  of  a  kingdom  ;  and  the  attempts  of 

*  [This  correspondence,  however,  cannot  be  legitimntely 
urged  US  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  contemporaneousnes? 
ot  the  ten  kinffs,  fur  it  is  doubtful  if  the  number  of  thf 
toe^  has  any  special  significance,  aud  no  stress  is  laid  upon 
it  in  the  explanation  of  the  vision.  Like  the  two  legs,  It 
forms  but  an  aecidcntal  accessory  ic  completing  the  figure. 
Otherwise  we  should  be  obliged  to  count  the  toes  on  both 
feet  likewise,  and  this  would  be  more  than  any  interpret«rt 
are  prepared  to  do.  ] 


CHAP.  VIL  1-28. 


ICl 


Luther.  Melancthon.  Geier,  Ph.  Nicolai  (De  regno 
Chriiti,  1.  I.,  c.  5  ss. ).  etc.,  to  make  the  ten 
horns  denote  ten  designated  states  which  were 
formed  out  of  the  Roman  world-monarchy — e.g. , 
Syria.  Asia,  Egypt,  Africa.  Greece.  Italy,  Ger- 
many. France,  Spain,  and  England,  or  (as  Nico- 
lai. 1.  c. ,  suggests)  S^-ria.  Egypt,  Greece,  Italy, 
Germany,  Poland.  Hungary,  France,  Spain,  and 
England — can  only  produce  absurd  and  arbitrary 
results.  In  v.  8  the  horn  is  clearly  represented 
as  a  person ;  and  accordingly  the  numerous 
horns  in  this  place  are  probably  intended  to 
denote  individual  royal  personages.  Of.  also 
chap.  viii.  21,  where  the  horn  is  said,  iu  the 
plainest  terms,  to  represent  a  personal  king.* 
For  the  rfst,  see  Ethico-fund.  principles,  etc., 
Nos.  2  and  3. — He  shaU  be  diverse  from  the 
first.  "As  the  fourth  kingdom  differs  (vs.  7, 
19)  from  the  other  three,  so  he  differs,  and  to 
his  disadvantage,  from  his  predecessors  ;  this  is 
true  generally,  but  especially  so  in  his  conduct 
towards  God  and  his  saints,  v.  25"  (Hitzig). — 
And  he  shaU  subdue  three  kings.      b"D",r~-, 

the  opposite  of  -"P?*,  as  in  chap.  ii.  21.  It  does 
not  denote  a  merely  moral  humiliation,  but  a 
complete  degradation,  and  even  a  hurling  down, 
a  seizing  of  their  dominion  (cf .  Ezek.  xxi.  32 ; 
Isa.  X.  33j.  This  is  also  shown  by  v.  8,  which 
speaks  very  plainly  about  a  "  plucking  up  by  the 
roots  "  of  three  of  the  former  horns  by  the  "  little 
horn,"  and  thereby  probably  refers  to  a  supplant- 
ing of  three  rulers  of  the  Seleucidae  by  the  vio- 
lence of  a  new  sovereign  (see  on  that  passage),  f — 
Verse  2.5.  And  he  shall  speak — words  against 
the  Most  High;  bb'?^ — lio,  like  the  Heb. 
C"~f~  ~?~i  Hos.  X.  4;  Isa.  viii.  10;  Iviii.  13. 
It  appears  from  vs.  8  and  20,  and  also  from  the 
later  parallel,  chap.  viii.  25  b,  that  blasphemous 
words  are  meant.  This  prophecy  was  certainly 
fulfilled  in  a  marked  degree  by  the  blasphemous 
words  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (1  Mace.  i.  24, 
etc.),  but  by  no  means  for  the  last  time;  cf.  the 
N.-T.  prophecies  relating  to  antichrist,  2  Thess. 
ii.  4 ;  Rev.  xiii.  5  et  seq.  *<"^?  "'?'?,  properly, 
"in  the  direction  of  the  Most  High,"  t.«. ,  agniiist 

•  [Kcil'a  reference  to  chap.  viii.  20-22  is  nnavailjng  against 
this  express  statement  of  the  text  here,  for  not  only  is  the 
great  goat  horn  there  undeniably  a  personal  ruler,  but  so 
are  likewise  the  "four  notable  hoins"  that  succeed  it  as  t^ie 
founder?  of  so  many  dynasties.  His  entire  ar^ment  on 
this  point  is  a  perversion  of  the  sense  :  '•  Since  the  ten 
hoi  ns  all  exist  at  the  same  time  together  on  the  head  of 
the  beast,  the  ten  kings  that  nri.-e  out  of  the  fourth  king- 
dom are  to  he  regarded  as  contemporary."  On  the  contrary, 
they  are  explicitly  said  to  •'  arise  'in  the  sight  of  the  pro- 
phet, as  if  they  were  not  there  origin;illy.  and  this  admits 
if  it  does  not  require,  the  idea  of  their  gradual  and  <-onsecn- 
tive  development.  So  in  the  ease  of  the  two-horned  ram 
(chap.  viii.  3)  we  might  with  equal  reason  have  presumed 
both  horns  to  have  arisen  simultaneously,  but  such  was  not 
the  fact.  Moreover,  as  they  are  stated  in  so  many  words  to 
be  kings  of  one  and  the  same  kingdom,  they  mu.st  in  the 
nature  of  the  case  be  successive  ;  for  ten  simultaneous  sove- 
reigns in  one  dominion  would  be  a  pa!p;ible  absurdity.  In 
the  case  of  the  last  three  only,  whose  fall  makes  room  for 
the  eleventh,  is  there  a  partial  simultaneousness.] 

t  ^Keil  contends  that  "'the  kinz  coming  after  them  can 
only  overthrow  three  of  the  ten  kingdoms  when  he  himself 
has  established  and  iwssesses  a  kingdom  or  empire  of  his 
own."'  But  such  is  not  the  ijrones--  represented  in  the  vision. 
The  little  horn  m  Ifie  act  o/ariHiiig  evidently  usurps  the 
room  previ>>usly  occupied  by  the  three  others.  It  is  this 
expansion  in  their  place  that  m  tkes  it  become  great.  They 
must,  theref  jre,  have  been  the.ii.-elve-  rivals  at  the  timo, 
and  not  well-established  in  their  seat,  when  this  fourth  con- 
testant a'osG  in  its  tirst  insignificance,] 
11 


the  Most  High  (who  is  personally  near),  "  against 
the  person  of  the  Most  High  "  (Kranichfeld).— 
And  shall  wear  out  ("  disturb")  the  saints  ol 
the  Most  High.  Hitzig' s  remark  is  too  far- 
fetched :  "  S<i?"  is  assonant  with  the  preceding 
parallel  ii^"^,  and  is  not  equivalent  to  '  disturb, 
wear  out '  (cf.  ri"i2  in  1  Chron.  xvii.  9,  and  the 
T.irg..  Isa.  iii.  15),  but  signifies  '  to  trj-,  oppress, 
make  wretched'  "  (?). — And  think  to  change 
times  and  laws.  Vr^r!  does  not  signify  "  sta 
tutii  sacra"  (Havemick),  but  =  Heb.  S^"?"": 
"  festival  seasons  "  (Lev.  xxiii.  iv.  ;  Isa.  xxxiii. 
20),  i.e.,  determined,  legally  appointed  times  foi 
religious  celebrations  in  general,  for  the  great 
annual  feasts  as  well  as  for  the  weekly  and 
monthly  (Sabbaths  and  new  moons) ;  cf.  Xum. 
xxviii.  2.  The  following  r"1"i,  "and  law,  tra- 
ditional usage,"  indicates  that  the  impious  king 
shall  not  merely  endeavor  to  change  the  ap- 
pointed tunes  of  these  rites,  but  that  he  shall 
seek  to  abrogate  the  ceremonial  observances  of 
religion  themselves  ;  hence,  what  was  formerly 
said  in  a  good  sense  (chip.  ii.  21)  of  God,  the 
absolutely  perfect  and  omnipotent  "  changer  of 
times  and  seasons,"  is  here  predicated  in  a  bad 
sense  of  His  dsemoniacal  adversary,  the  impious 
'AiT/v>fof.  Cf.  the  attempts  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes, recorded  in  1  Mace.  i.  45  et  seq. ;  2 
.Mace.  vi.  2-7,  to  destroy  the  theocratic  system 
by  abrogating  the  daily  sacrifices,  the  observance 
of  Sabbaths  and  feasts,  and  by  introducing  the 
sacrifice  of  unclean  beasts,  and  the  worship  of 
Jupiter  and  Bacchus — attempts  in  which  the 
prophecy  before  us  found  its  more  immediate 
historical  fulfilment,  while  its  idtimate  realiza 
tion  must  be  looked  for  in  the  last  times,  accord 
ing  to  2  Thess.  ii.  4;  Rev.  xiii.  8,  12  et  seq.— 
And  they  shall  be  given  into  his  hand  until  a 
time  and  (two)  times  and  the  dividing  of  (or, 
"  a  half  ")  time.  The  expression  sounds,  upon 
the  whole,  like  Mic.  v.  26  ;  but  the  duraliou  of 
the  period  of  suffering  imposed  by  the  permis- 
sion and  paedagogic  wisdom  of  God  is  somewhat 
more  definitely  fixed  in  this  instance,  without, 
however,  omitting  the  mystical  feature  in  this 
limitation  which  requires  to  be  interpreted. 
The  aggregate  duration  of  this  time  of  altiictioa 
is  divided  into  three  distinct  periods,  which,  how- 
ever, are  suflSciently  indefinite  in  themselves, 
and  therefore  in  no  wise  indicate  the  real  mea- 
sure of  time  in  the  prophet's  mind  ;  for  while 
it  is  entirely  probable  that  l^?  has  the  same  sig- 
nification here  as  in  chap.  iv.  13,  namely.  "  a 
year  "  (see  on  that  passage),  yet  the  duration  o£ 
"  a  year  "  in  a  vision  of  the  future,  which  con- 
stantly presents  symbolic  conceptions,  is  upon 
the  whole  extremely  doubtful.  It  must  remain 
an  open  question  whether  ordinary  calendar 
years  are  intended,  or,  what  is  scarcely  less 
probable  in  itself,  whether  mystical  periods  are 
referred  to,  which  are  measured  by  a  standard 
not  known  to  men,  but  only  to  God.*     It  may 

*  [Few  readers,  however,  will  be  content  with  this  inde- 
finite exposition  of  these  sharp'y  defined  and  frequently 
reiterated  su.tements  of  time  -.vith  reference  to  the  events 
predicted.  The  dilficulties  in  the  way  of  their  litaral  appli- 
cation to  the  period  of  desecration  of  the  Temple  by  .Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes  do  not  appear  so  formidable  as  to  requir* 
such  a  vague  interpretation.  See  under  the  Rthico-fujid» 
mental  considerations  below.) 


162 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


be  shown  with  more  confidence  how  the  three 
particular  designations  of  time,  TJ^",  T'?'^?,  and 
1~"  3v2.  are  related  to  each  other,  and  also  why 
precisel3'  these  terms  are  employed  in  the  pro- 
phecy, which  are  repeated  in  the  Heb.  of  the 
parallel,  chap.  xii.  7,  iu  the  words  ~>i^,  Cili'TQ 
and  ■^?n''J.  In  harmony  with  a  not  infrequent 
Chaldee  usage,  the  plural  V:l-?  ^^  P^^  ^°^  ^^^ 
dual  (cf.  Targ. ,  Am.  iv.  6 ;  Ex.  xi.  5  ;  Num. 
six.  3i) ;  supra,  v.  8  et  seq. ,  and,  upon  the  whole 
question,  Winer,  §  55,  3),  and  therefore,  like 
the  corresponding  Heb.  BilJitt,  represents  a 
double  period,  a  pair  of  times,  and,  in  case  l^J-' 
signifies  a  year,  a  period  of  tico  years.  The  con- 
verse holds  with  3pp,  which,  though  in  itself 
denoting  any  fraction  whatever,  is  shown  posi- 
tively by  the  parallel  "^n  in  xii.  7  to  signify  ' '  a 
half."  Hence  a  double  year  is  at  first  added  to 
the  year  which  stands  at  the  beginning,  and 
afterward  another  half  year.  The  period  of  3+ 
years  which  thus  results  is  symbolically  signifi- 
cant, inasmuch  as  it  forms  the  half  of  seven 
years,  and  therefore  stands  related  to  the  pro- 
phetically significant  "  seven  times"  in  chap.  iv. 
13,  as  the  half  to  the  whole.  If,  therefore, 
the  sevenfold  number  of  the  years  passed  in 
lycanthropy  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (which  was  not 
to  be  taken  literally,  but  ideally  and  propheti- 
cally) denoted,  in  a  general  way,  an  extended 
duration  of  the  sufferings  imposed  on  him  by 
God,  it  follows  that  the  present  figures  indicate 
a  period  of  affliction  t/iiit  k  shorter  by  one-half. 
"A  time,  and  times,  and  a  half  time"  repre- 
sents a  time  of  suffering  that  is  abbreviated  by 
one-half,  or  that  is  interrupted  at  the  middle, 
similar  to  that  referred  to  iu  the  prophetic  words 
of  Christ :  e'i  fUj  iKu'/.oiidttt/^cav  ui  t'/iupat  f \'fn'n/,  ovk 
n"  iijuiii/  -una  aapE,  Matt.  xxiv.  22;  Mark  xiii. 
20.  The  same  idea  of  a  shortened  or  halved 
time  of  affliction  is  expressed  by  the  "  half- 
week  "  (i.e..  half  week  of  years)  iu  chap.  ix.  27, 
which,  like  the  1,290  days  in  chap.  xii.  11  (or  the 
1,200  days  or  42  months  of  the  Apocalypse,  xi. 
2  et  seq.  ;  xiii.  5),  is  merely  a  tolerably  exact 
designation  of  the  3^  years,  in  different  lan- 
guage. It  will  be  shown  hereafter  that  this 
prophecy  of  the  affliction  of  Israel  during  3| 
years  prior  to  its  deliverance  likewise  had  a 
typical  fulfilment  in  the  history  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  while  its  final  realization  is  reserved 
for  the  eschatological  future.*  For  the  present 
it  will  be  necessary  to  remember  merely,  as  the 
result  of  an  uuprejudiced  exegesis  having  a  suit- 
able regard  for  the  prophetic  us.age  of  language 
in  this  book,  that  a  strictly  litei'al  conception  of 
the  period  of  3*  years  will  hardly  conform  to 
the  sense  of  the  prophecy,  and  that  there  is 


*  [Some  of  those  modem  interpreters  who  hold  in  pnrt  to 
the  * ' year-f or-a-day  theory"  nmke  the  little  horn  in  this 
passage  to  be  different  from  that  in  ch.  viii.,  referring  the 
latter  to  Autiochus  Epiphanes,  but  the  former  to  the  papacy 
or  else  to  Mohammeti'anism.  Such  as  maintain  that  the 
days  stand  for  years  in  both  instances  regard  the  difference 
In  the  periods  oetween  this  passage  and  that  (1,II50  years 
here  and  2,300  there)  as  caused  by  computing  the  period  in 
the  one  case  from  the  rise  of  the  power  to  its  do\mfall,  and 
In  the  other  from  Daniel'n  own  time.  In  either  case  the 
mme  fatal  objection  applies,  that  there  is  no  good  evidence 
Df  such  a  Bymbolic  use  of  the  word  '*  day"  by  Daniel.] 


therefore  no  need  to  seek  for  a  period  of  suffer 
ing  iu  the  history  of  the  Jews,  while  subject  tc 
that  Syrian  despot,  which  shall  cover  precisely 
that  length  of  time,  for  the  purpose  of  demon- 
strating that  first  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy.  * 
— But  the  judgment  shall  sit  j  of.  v.  10  b,  and 
also  V.  22. — And  they  shall  take  away  his  do- 
minion, to  consume  and  to  destroy  (it)  unto  the 
end.  Ri9rr  is  to  be  repeated,  as  the  accusa- 
tive of  the  object  to  the  two  infinitives.  REio  iJi 
"unto  the  realized  end,"  i.e.,  to  the  end  of  the 
last  God-opposed  world-power,  which  marks  the 
end  of  the  heathen  world-power  as  a  whole. 
SSIO  therefore  designates  (unlike  chap.  vi.  27, 
where  the  never-accomplished  end  of  God's 
kingdom  is  referred  to)  the  goal  at  the  end  of 
the  development  of  earthly  dominion,  which 
coincides  with  the  erection  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  (v.  13  et  seq.). — Terse  27.  And  the  king- 
dom and  dominion  and  the  greatness  of  the 
kingdom("  kingdoms") ;  a  triad  similar  to  that 
in  V.  14,  differing  only  in  the  substitution  of 
^*^'I2'^, ' '  the  greatness  "  (Luther,  "  the  power  "), 
for  "Ip'^,  "glory."  rriabJO  I'l  depends  equally 
on  all  the  three  nouns  as  a  subjective  genitive, 
and  therefore  denotes  that  the  dominion,  power, 
and  greatness  possessed  by  all  the  heathen  king- 
doms is  intended.  On  the  meaning  of  the  ex- 
pression "  of  the  kingdoms  under  the  whole 
heaven,"  see  supra,  on  v.  12. 

Verse  28.  The  impression  made  on  Daniel  by 
what  he  has  seen  andheard.  Hitherto  is  the  end 
of  the  matter  (or  "remarks"),  namely  of  the 
interpreter,  the  conclusion  of  which  coincides 
with  the  end  of  the  dream.  De  Wette,  Hitzig, 
etc. ,  render  it  inappropriately,  and  contrary  to 
the  sense  of  '*^'?'?,  "  Thus  far  the  history  " — an 
interpretation  which  finds  no  sujjport  in  chap, 
xii.  6. — As  for  me,  Daniel,  my  cogitations 
much  troubled  me,  namely,  after  awaking  from 
his  dream-vision;  cf.  ii.  1  ;  iv.  2. — And  (the 
color  of)  my  countenance  changed  iu  me.  Cf . 
chap.  V.  9,  where  the  same  expression  is  found, 
and  chap.  x.  8,  which  is  parallel  in  substance. — 
But  I  kept  the  matter  in  my  heart,  viz.  ;  th« 
remarks  of  the  interpreting  angel,  v.  17  et  seq., 
and  consequently,  the  subject  and  signification 
of  the  dream-vision.     Cf.  Ltike  ii.  19. 


ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES  RELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLO- 
GETICAL     REMARKS,      AND      HOMILETICAL 

SUGGESTIONS. 

1 .  After  what  has  been  remarked,  it  is  app.ar- 
ent  that  the  principal  force  and  the  greatest  in- 
terest of  the  prophetic  descriptions  of  this  chap- 
ter centre  in  fhe  fourth  world-kingdjm  and  in  its 
development  as  an  anti-christian  power,  which 
immediately  prepares  the  way  for  the  judicial 
advent  of  Christ.     In  the  parallel  description  in 


*  [Keil.  in  like  manner,  argues  for  the  purely  symbolical 
and  indefinite  import  of  this  designation  of  time,  being 
driven  thereto)  by  his  theory  that  this  whole  prophecy  applies 
to  the  duration  nf  the  Ronisn  power,  which  he  extends  into 
the  unknown  future.  He  has  all  along  contended  against 
a  literal  interpretation  of  these  cbrouological  data  as  they 
eeeui  to  be.] 


CHAP.  Vn.  1-28. 


16J 


the  second  chapter, — where  the  series  of  world- 
kingiioms  was  represented  by  four  metallic  sub- 
stances, respecti%'ely  inferior  to  each  other  in 
value,  in  the  order  of  their  succession,  and  al- 
though together  forming  a  great  colossus,  yet 
indicating  its  perishable  nature  by  the  weakness 
of  the  feet  on  which  it  rested — the  observation 
of  both  the  dreaming  king  and  the  interpreting 
prophet  was  fixed  equally  on  all  the  four  world- 
monarchies.  Their  intimate  relations  to  each 
other,  their  separation,  and  their  subjection  to 
the  same  ultimate  fate  through  the  agency  of 
the  rock  of  Messiah's  kingdom,  formed  the  prin- 
cipal features  of  that  prophecy,  which,  however, 
likewise  dwelt  more  extensively  upon  the  fourth 
kingdom  than  upon  its  predecessors  (v.  40  et 
seq. ) ;  but  the  principal  re-ason  for  the  promin- 
ence thus  given  to  the  last  kingdom  in  the  series, 
existed  substantially  in  the  fact  that  the  aim 
was  to  point  out  that  its  heterogeneous  elements 
and  its  divisions  laid  the  foundation  for  its  own 
ruin,  and,  as  a  matter  of  course,  for  the  fall  and 
ruin  of  the  former  empires.  The  case  is  differ- 
ent with  the  present  vision  and  its  interpretation. 
Each  of  the  four  bea.sts  which  in  this  instance 
represent  the  world-kingdoms  is  indeed  drawn 
with  nervous  and  strongly  characterizing  strokes, 
that  admit  of  no  doubt  respecting  their  identity 
with  the  four  constituents  of  the  image  (v.  4  et 
seq) ;  but  the  attention  of  the  narrator  is  prin- 
cipally directed  to  the  fourth  beast,  and  to  the 
horn  which  denotes  the  height  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  world-power  (v.  7  et  seq.  ;  11  et 
seq.),  even  during  the  dream-vision  itself.  The 
interpretation  of  the  vi.sion  disposes  of  the  first 
three  beasts  and  their  reference  to  the  three 
earliest  world-kingdoms  very  summarily  (v.  17), 
but  emphasizes  the  fourth  beast  and  its  '•  little 
horn  which  speaks  blasphemous  things."  as  Sym- 
bols of  the  final  phase  of  development  on  the 
part  of  the  world-power,  and  of  the  reign  of 
antichrist  produced  by  it ;  for  not  only  are  the 
characteristic  peculiarities  of  this  beast  noticed 
twice  over,  the  second  time  in  a  recapitulation 
denoting  the  reflections  of  the  prophet  concern- 
ing its  nature  and  appearance  (vs.  18-22),  but 
they  receive  a  somewhat  detailed  explanation 
(vs.  23-26),  which  does  not  indeed  display  the 
clearness  of  the  disclosures  in  chapters  viii.,  xi., 
and  -xii.  relating  to  the  same  events  in  the  period 
immediately  prior  to  the  Messianic  future,  but 
which  is  nevertheless  far  superior  to  all  the  for- 
mer prophetic  sections  of  the  book,  and  espe- 
cially to  that  contained  in  chap.  ii. ,  in  the  pre- 
cision and  clearness  of  its  expositions. 

2.  In  order  to  a  correct  apprehension  of  the 
Messianic  bearing  of  this  prophecy,  it  is  requisite 
before  all  else,  that  the  identity  of  the  monar- 
chial  relations  and  situations  indicated  in  this 
chapter  with  those  described  in  chapters  viii. .  xi. , 
and  xii.  should  be  carefully  observed  ;  or,  in 
other  words,  that  the  common  reference  of  the 
prophecies  in  all  these  chapters  to  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  and  the  Maccabrean  period,  as  mark- 
ing their  more  immedi,ate  fulfilment,  should  be 
recognized.  The  following  considerations  will 
demonstrate  th.at  this  reference  is  common  to 
the  prophecies  mentioned  (and  also  to  that  con- 
tained in  chap.  ix.  24^27),  and  that,  consequent- 
ly, the  second  part  of  the  book  of  Daniel  refers, 
as  a  whole,  to  that  time  as  the  epoch  of  its  first 
».nd  more  immediate  fulfilment : 


a.  The  world-power  in  question  is  described  as 
dirided  and  suhjcct  to  disxeiisions  in  itstif,  in  all 
the  parallel  representations,  especially  in  chap, 
ii.  and  vii.  on  the  one  hand  and  chap.  xi.  on  the 
other.  This  agreement  extends  even  to  the 
point,  that  in  both  instances,  chap,  ii,  43  as 
well  as  chap.  xi.  6,  17,  the  vain  attempts  to 
secure  peace  by  means  of  intermarriages  are 
noticed  (see  on  iL  43  and  cf.  infra,  on  chap.  xi. , 
1.  c). 

b.  The  number  ten,  is  applied  to  the  kings  of 
the  fourth  monarchy,  and  receives  prominent 
mention  in  at  least  two  of  the  parallel  descrip- 
tions (chap.  vii.  and  xi. ),  although  merely  as  a 
symbolic  number,  which  finds  its  counterpart,  in 
a  general  way,  in  the  first  ten  possessors  of  the 
throne  of  the  Seleucidas.  (It  must  be  remem- 
bered, however,  that  [according  to  the  author's 
view]  neither  the  ten  toes  of  the  image  of  the 
monarchies,  chap.  ii.  42  et  seq.,  nor  the  four 
horns  of  the  Grecian  goat,  chap.  viii.  7  et  seq., 
refer  to  these  ten  predecessors  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  or  to  any  individual  kings  what- 
ever. ) 

c.  The  blasphemous  and  sacrilegious  course  of 
(lie  eleventh  king — symbolized  by  the  "little 
horn  " — towards  the  Most  High,  His  law,  and 
His  saints,  is  described  in  chap.  vii.  (vs.  8,  11, 
20-25),  and  more  fully  in  chap.  viii.  10,  24  et 
seq. ;  ix.  24  et  seq.  [?] ;  xi.  31 , 3(i,  in  a  manner  that 
recalls  the  statements  of  the  Maccabiean  booke 
relating  to  the  abominable  attempts  of  Epiphanes 
to  profane  the  Jewish  worship  and  oppress  its 
adherents,  with  the  liveliest  and  strongest  em- 
phasis. 

d.  Chapters  vii.  25  ;  ix.  27 ;  xii.  7  et  seq. , 
agree  in  limiting  the  duration  of  the  tribulation 
caused  by  the  antichristian  tyrant  to  3^  years. 
(In  relation  to  the  merely  apparent  discrepancy 
in  the  duration  of  the  suffering,  as  stated  in  chap, 
viii.  14  and  chap.  xii.  12,  see  on  those  passages.) 

e.  The  several  descriptions  agree  in  supersed- 
ing and  destroying  the  antichristian  supremacy 
by  the  erection  of  a  Messianic  kingdom.  This  is 
noi  only  asserted  in  the  chapter  before  us  and  in 
chap.  ii.  44  etseq.,  but  also  in  chap,  viii.,  where 
the  breaking  of  the  foe  witiiotit  /lands  (v.  25)  13 
evidently  synonymous  with  the  loosening  of  the 
destroying  stone  "without  hand  "  in  chap.  ii. 
34,  45,  and  where  the  "justifying"  (v.  14)  of 
the  desolated  sanctuary  denotes  nothing  else 
than  the  introduction  of  the  Messianic  period  ot 
salvation.  Further  illustrations  of  this  head 
appear  in  chap.  ix.  24  and  in  xii.  1  et  seq.,  7  et 
seq. ,  where  the  Messiah  likewise  is  described  aa 
the  direct  opponent  and  victorious  successor  of 
antichrist  and  his  abominations.  Hengstenberg 
(p.  213  etseq.),  Hiivernick.  Ebrard  (Offenb.  Jo/i.. 
p.  84  et  seq.),  Ziindel  (p.  119),  and  Auherlen  (p. 
197  et  seq.)  attempt  in  vain  to  deny  the  identity 
of  the  antichrist  noticed  in  chapters  ii.  and  vii. 
with  the  enemy  of  the  people  of  God  described 
in  chapters  viii.  and  ix. ,  asserting  that  the  for- 
mer Ls  to  be  looked  for  in  N. -T.  times  immedi- 
ately prior  to  Mes.siah's  second  advent,  while  the 
latter  appeared  and  was  destroyed  during  the 
Old  Dispensation  and  before  the  first  advent  of 
Christ,  and  that  the  prophecies  in  chapters  ii. 
and  vii.  relate  to  the  eschatological  antichrist, 
while  those  in  viii.  and  xi.  denote  a  typical  per 
sonage  ! — as  if  the  descriptions  in  chap.  vii.  25 
did  not  already  indicate  on  opponent  of  the  O.  -T. 


164 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


church  and  ceremonial !  as  if  the  "  changing  of 
(festal)  times  and  laws,"  there  referred  to,  coald 
designate  anything  but  the  Tiolent  oflenceR 
against  the  temple  and  the  sacrifices  of  the  Old 
(/'ovenant,  as  described  in  chapters  viii. ,  ix. ,  and 
XI.  (see  supra  on  v.  25,  and  also  under  c)  !  and 
as  if  an  Israelitish  prophet  could  possibly  sus- 
pect that  the  worship  of  Messianic  tunes  would 
differ  from  that  of  the  former  dispensation ;  and 
as  if  he  had  not,  in  chap.  ix.  24,  even  expressly 
opened  the  prospect  of  a  restoration  of  the  O.  -T. 
sacrifices  and  sanctuary  services  when  Messiah 
should  appear  (see  on  that  passage)  !  An  unpre- 
judiced exegesis,  governed  by  scientific  princi- 
ples, can  discover  but  a  single  antichrist  in  all 
the  parallel  prophecies,  and  that  one  is  clearly 
described  as  the  immediate  predecessor  of  the 
^lessiah,  who  supersedes  and  destroys  him.  * 
The  prophet,  however,  wag  evidently  ignorant 
of  the  merely  typical  importance  of  this  anti- 
ihrist,  as  being  only  a  forerunner  of  the  anti- 
christ A  the  last  times  (to  whom  refer  the  N.  -T. 
desr.iptions  of  the  future,  which  are  based  upon 
th.s  book  indeed,  and  which  frequently  recall 
its  features — in  2  Thess.  ii.  ;  Rev.  xi.  7  ;  xiii.  1 
et  seq.  ;  xvii.  ;  xix.  19  et  seq.) ;  for  instead  of 
representing  the  former  as  merely  an  imperfect 
analogue  of  the  incomparably  more  atrocious 
impiety,  the  far  more  concentrated  and  diaboli- 
cal wickedness  of  the  latter,  as  he  must  have 
done  if  he  were  actually  conscious  that  the  dis- 
tinction between  type  and  anti-type  existed  in 
this  case,  he  ever3-where  presents  the  idea  of  a 
flagrant  rebellion  against  the  Most  High,  and  of 
the  desecration  of  the  sanctuary,  and  the  at- 
tempted extirpation  of  the  true  religion,  in  ex- 
pressions of  equal  force.  And  instead  of  dwell- 
ing chiefly  on  the  anti-type  as  the  more  impor- 
tant character,  and  as  being  more  signilicant  in 
his  relations  to  Messiah's  work,  as  might  have 
been  expected,  he  pursues  a  contrary  course, 
and  furnishes  a  far  more  thorough  and  realistic 
praphetic  description  of  the  type  ! — We  are 
therefore  obUged  to  conclude  that,  in  harmony 
with  the  law  of  prophetic  perspective,  Daniel 
saw  the  type  and  anti-type,  the  vista  of  Old  and 
Kew-Testament  times,  the  scenes  of  the  more 
immediate  future  and  those  of  the  eschatological 
period,  as  a  comprehensice  whole,  and  that  from 
his  point  of  view,  as  a  captive  in  Babylon,  he  no 


*  [Keil  seek'  (p.  258  et  seq.)  to  make  the  most  of  the  in- 
cidental variations  in  the  description  of  the  "little  horn," 
in  ch.  vii.  and  v\n.  :  but  his  points  are  minute  and  often 
far-fetched,  whereas  the  coincidences  are  striking,  numer- 
ous, and  essential.  Consnitthe  harmonic  table  in  the  intro- 
duction. Lest  we  might  be  thought  to  treat  the  opposite 
view  too  lightly,  we  briefly  note  the  differences  adduced  by 
Keil.  1.  The  little  horn  of  ch.  vii.  rises  out  of  one  of  the 
four  horns  without  adding  to  their  number  or  injuring  them  ; 
that  of  ch.  viii.  arises  among  the  ten  as  an  additional  nr 
parallel  element,  and  uproots  three.  This  merely  proves 
that  the  four  iiowers  are  not  identical  with  the  ten  hom.s 
which  is  precisely  our  view.  2.  The  enemy  in  ch.  vii.  goes 
much  farther  in  his  violence  than  that  in  ch.  viii.  ;  but  as 
the  conduct  is  of  the  same  eeneral  character,  this  is  evi- 
dently but  a  fuller  or  more  detailed  description.  Both  cer- 
tftinly  tallied  with  the  behavior  of  Autiochus.  It  is  vain  to 
allege  that  in  one  chapter  the  persecutor  is  not  an  antichrist 
because  he  is  not  directly  said  to  arrogate  divinity  as  in 
the  other  chapter,  but  only  to  oppose  the  people  of  God  :  for 
t.-.r!.e  are  everywhere  in  the  Bible  identihed  with  God  hira- 
t*e]f,  and  their  cause  and  interests  are  his  likewise.  3.  The 
periods  in  the  two  cases  are  diflferent  (i.-MH)  days,  and  a 
year  and  a  half,  or  1.2110.  or  l.."W5  days).  This  is  readily 
explained  as  including  in  some  ptissages  more  accessory  cir- 
cumstances than  in  others.  Sec  the  exegetical  remarks  ou 
each.] 


more  saw  the  interval  between  the  two  featnrei 
in  the  history  of  the  future,  although  it  covered 
thousands  of  years,  than  the  pilgrim  who  jour- 
neys toward  a  distant  goal  is  able  to  observe  the 
broad  and  depressed  valley  that  intervenes  be- 
tween the  mountain  immediately  before  him 
and  that  which  seems  to  rise  in  close  proximity 
beyond  it.  Cf.  Hofmann,  Weissagvng  und  Erf., 
p.  313  et  seq.,  where  it  is  correctly  remarked, 
with  reference  to  the  closing  verses  of  chap.  xi. , 
which  describe  the  terrible  end  of  the  typical  an- 
tichrist, Antiochus  Epiphanes,  that  "  at  a  subse- 
quent point  he  (the  prophet,  or  rather  the  angel 
who  speaks  to  him)  observes  only  the  final  end 
of  national  history,  the  fear  and  tribulation 
which  overtake  the  whole  world,  and  the  preser- 
vation of  Israel  in  the  midst  of  it,  in  addition  to 
the  final  end  of  human  history,  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead  to  Ufe  or  to  perdition  (chap.  xii.  1- 

3) The  connection  of  these  last  things 

with  the  prospect  of  the  end  of  that  oppressor 
of  Israel  is  not  different,  for  instance,  from  that 
by  which  Isaiah  speaks  of  the  impending  attack 
on  Jerusalem  by  Assyria  as  the  final  alarm  of 
that  city,  or  which  causes  Jeremiah  to  regard 
the  end  of  the  seventy  years  as  coinciding  with 
the  end  of  all  the  afflictions  of  his  people." 
Similar  views  are  advanced  by  the  same  author 
in  his  Schriftbeweis,  U.  2,  547  et  seq. ,  and  also 
by  DeUtzsch,  p.  285  :  "It  is  a  law  of  Messianic 
history  that  the  fulfilment  of  a  prophecy,  if  not 
completed  by  one  event,  must  produce  succes- 
sive developments,  until  the  actual  state  that 
has  been  realized  shall  correspond  to  the  sense 
and  word  of  the  prophecy.  The  afflictions 
caused  by  Antiochus  were  not  the  last  experi- 
enced by  God's  people  ;  but  the  book  of  Daniel 
predicts  them  as  the  last,  as  Tsaiah  in  the  down- 
fall of  Assyria,  chapter  x. ,  and  Habakkuk  in  the 
destruction  of  Babylon,  chap.  ii.  et  seq. ,  foretell 
the  overthrow  of  the  world-power.  The  range 
of  the  prophet's  vision  is  decided  by  the  border 
of  the  horizon  where  arises  the  glory  of  the  con- 
gregation of  God,  but  not  the  measure  of  the 
meaning  which  the  Spirit  of  prophecy  introduces 
into  his  words,  and  which  history  gradually  un- 
folds." 

3.  While,  however,  the  more  immediate  ful- 
filment of  the  predicted  misfortunes  of  the 
dream-vision  is  to  be  chiefly,  and  even  exclu- 
sively sought  in  the  period  of  tribulation  marked 
by  the  reign  of  the  Seleucidas  and  the  revolt  of 
the  Asmonmans,  it  does  not  follow  in  any  degree 
that  a  contemporary  of  that  generation  must  be 
regarded  as  the  composer  of  this  vision,  and  that 
therefore  it  must  be  held  to  be  a  prophecy  forged 
ex  eventu.  In  opposition  to  this  assumption  of 
a  pseudological  conveutional  composition  of  the 
chapter  by  an  apocalyptist  of  the  Maccabsean 
period,  it  must  be  observed  that  discrepancies 
exist  between  several  leading  characteristic  fea- 
tures of  the  prophecy  and  the  facts  connected 
with  the  history  of  the  sufferings  of  Israel  under 
Antiochus,  and  also  the  facts  connected  with  the 
development  of  the  empire,  which  are  ungues- 
timiablymore  vinrked  than  the  origin  of  the  chap- 
ter in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees  uould  justify  in 
any  vay.     Above  all  we  notice  the  following  : 

a.  The  difference  betweer  the  ten  horns  of  the 
fourth  beast  (v.  7et  seq..  20,  24)  and  the  number 
of  the  predecessors  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  on 
th«  throne  of  the  Seleucids.      The  most  plan- 


CHAP.  VII.  1-28. 


1G5 


Bible  method  of  reconciling  the  number  of  the 
horns  with  that  of  the  early  Seleuoidae — hence, 
of  fixing  the  number  of  the  latter  at  ten,  while 
Antiochus  follows  as  the  eleventh — is  that  adopt- 
ed by  Prideaux,  Bertholdt,  Von  Lengerke,  De- 
Utzsch,  and  Eivald,  by  which  Alexander  the  Great 
is  excluded  from  the  series,  and  Seleucus 
Nicator  heads  the  Ust.  This  certainly  secures 
a  succession  of  seven  rulers  down  to  Seleucus 
IV.  Philopator,  the  brother  and  predecessor  of 
Ant.  Epiphanes  (1.  Seleucus  Nicator,  B.  C.  312- 
280;  2.  Antiochus  Soter,  279-201 ;  3.  Antiochus 
Theos,  260-246;  4.  Seleucus  Callinicus,  245- 
226 ;  5.  Seleucus  Ceraunus,  225-223  ;  6.  An- 
tiochus the  Great,  222-187  ;  7.  Seleucus  Philo- 
pator, 186-176)  ;  but  every  attempt  to  designate 
the  three  missing  monarchs,  who  should  fill  the 
brief  interregnum  and  state  of  restless  anarchy 
which  preceded  the  accession  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  results  in  failure.  The  ordinary  re- 
source is  to  assume  that  these  three  kings,  whom 
Antiochus  dethroned  and  superseded,  or,  as  the 
figurative  language  in  v.  8  has  it,  ''the  three 
horns  which  were  uprooted  before  the  little  horn 
came  up,"  were  (1)  Demetrius,  the  eldest  son  of 
Seleucus  Philopator,  and  therefore  the  nephew 
of  Ant.  Epiphanes,  who  was  at  Rome  as  a  host- 
age when  his  father  died,  and  whose  crown  was 
usurped  in  his  absence  by  his  uncle  (who  had 
just  returned  to  Syria  from  an  extended  sojourn 
in  Rome,  where  he  had  likewise  been  a  hostage) ; 
(2)  Heliodorus,  the  murderer  of  Seleucus  Philo- 
pator (see  chap.  xi.  20),  who  occupied  the  throne 
for  a  short  time  after  poisoning  that  king,  until 
Epiphanes  dethroned  him  ;  and  finally  (3 )  Ptol- 
emy IV.  Philometer,  king  of  Egypt,  a  minor  at 
the  time,  who  was  the  son  of  Cleopatra,  the 
daughter  of  Antiochus  the  Great  and  sister  of 
Epiphanes.  It  is  assumed  that  this  queen  laid 
claim  to  the  throne  of  the  Seleucidfe  for  her  eon, 
or  at  least  to  the  provinces  of  Palestine  and 
Phoenicia,  which  adjoined  Egypt.  In  point  of 
fact,  however,  none  of  these  rivals  of  Epiphanes 
could  be  regarded  as  the  king  of  Syria,  for  Heli- 
odorus was  a  mere  usurper,  who  was  dethroned 
after  a  brief  reign,  and  there  is  no  record  to 
show  that  either  Demetrius  or  Ptolemy  Philo- 
meter pretended  to  the  throne  with  any  degree 
of  earnestness.*  Hence  a  variety  of  different 
explanations  have  been  attempted;  as,  for  in- 
stance, Alexander  the  Great  has  been  included 
in  the  series  of  the  ten  kings,  as  being  the  ac- 
tual founder  of  the  empire  of  the  Seleucidse  (!), 
so  that  the  line  begins  with  him  and  closes  with 
Seleucus  Philopator  as  the  eighth,  Heliodorus 
as  the  ninth,  and  Demetrius  as  the  tenth  repre- 
sentative of  that  dynasty  (thus  Hitzig,  on  the 
passage,  emd  Hilgenfeld,  Dl4  Prop/wten  Esra 
und  Daniel,  1863,  p.  82) ;  or  again,  attention  is 

*  [Keil  urges  these  objections  with  all  their  force  to  disprove 
any  reference  here  to  the  time  of  the  Seleucidae  ;  but  they 
apply  with  equal  and  even  greater  force  to  the  Roman  list  of 
emperors.  It  does  not  appear  however,  that  the  three  horns 
in  question  represent  actually  reigning  k.ngs,  nor  do  the 
terms  "plucked  up"  and  "fell''  cle-irly  mean  dethrone- 
ment. It  is  sufBcient  that  they  were  royal  personages  who 
claimed  or  were  entitled  to  the  throne.  One  of  them,  at 
lea-t,  Heliodorus,  actually  occupied  it,  for  a  brief  period,  in- 
deed, but  long  enough  to  come  within  the  description.  The 
other  two,  as  being  ieg.timate  heirs,  may  fairly  be  designated 
as  prtiicefi,  and  this  is  all  that  the  figure  requires.  The  partial 
and  ternixirary  royalty  of  all  three  is  evidently  denoted  by 
their  speedily  succumbing  to  the  upstart.  It  is  difficult  to 
imagine  a  case  of  four  rivals  to  the  same  throne  that  would 
more  accurately  answer  to  the  vision.] 


caUed  to  the  fact  that  exactly  that  peri<d  in  the 
history  of  Syria  which  immediately  precedes  the 
reign  of  Epiphanes,  is  known  to  be  particularly 
obscure,  uncertain,  and  defective  in  its  records 
(Ewald,  and  also  Hitzig  and  Kamphausen)  ;  or 
it  is  observed  that  on  the  analogy  of  the  toes  of 
the  image,  which  were  partly  of  clay  and  partlj 
of  iron,  the  requisite  number  of  kings  is  prob- 
ably to  be  found  both  among  the  Seleucidae  and 
the  Ptolemies  (Rosenmiiller,  Delitzsch,  following 
Porphyry,  Polychron,  and  other  ancients);  or 
the  attempt  to  discover  a  succession  of  ten  kings 
is  wholly  given  up,  and  the  ten  horns  are  regard- 
ed as  denoting  ten  con  temporary  ivieTs,  e.g.,  ten 
satraps  or  generals  of  Alexander  the  Great, 
among  whom  the  three  that  Seleucus  Xicatot 
conquered,  Antigonus,  Ptolemy  Lagus,  and  Lysi- 
machus,  were  especially  prominent  (Bleek,  p. 
68).  The  uncertain  and  unsatisfactory  nature 
of  all  these  attempts  at  an  explanation,  which 
Delitz.sch  (p.  283)  also  acknowledges  in  substance, 
has  finally  led  even  several  advocates  of  the 
theory  of  the  Maccabtean  composition  of  this 
section  {e.g.,  Hertzfeld.  Oenchkhte  IsraeUs)  to 
adopt  the  only  correct  view,  on  which  the  num- 
ber ten  as  applied  to  the  horns  is  a  round  or  sym- 
bolic number,  whose  more  specific  interpretation 
it  is  useless  to  attempt.  This  view  is  also  held 
in  substance  by  a  majority  of  the  expositors  who 
refer  the  fourth  beast  to  the  lioman  world- 
power  and  the  occidental-Christian  kingdoms 
which  emanated  from  it,  although  they  hold 
fast  to  the  really  prophetic  character  of  the 
vision,  and  therefore  its  origin  with  Daniel  and 
during  the  captivity.*  We  have  already  shown 
that  the  advocacy  of  the  genuineness  of  thi 
prophetic  book  by  no  means  involves,  as  a  neces 
sary  consequence,  the  interpretation  by  which 
the  fourth  beast  designates  Rome.  It  has  also 
been  shown,  on  v.  8,  that  we  must  be  content 
with  a  general  and  symbolic  explanation  of  the 
subordinate  three-fold  number  of  the  horns,  as 
well  as  of  the  number  ten.  Cf.  infra,  on  chap, 
xi.  2  et  seq. 

b.  The  statement  in  v.  25,  according  to  which 
the  period  of  tribulation,  prepared  for  God's 
people  by  the  eleventh  king  of  the  fourth  mon- 
archy, was  to  cover  "a  time,  and  two  times,  and 
a  half  time  "  (hence  according  to  chap.  iv.  13 
was  to  extend  over  three  and  a  half  years  and 
then  to  be  ended  by  an  act  of  Divine  judgment), 
ivill  likewise  admit  of  no  exact  and  thoroughly 


*  [So  formidable  is  this  difficulty  on  the  Roman  theory  of 
interpretation  that  Keil,  its  last  most  noted  advocate,  takea 
refuge  in  a  remarkable  postponement  of  the  solution. 
"  The  kingdoms  represented  by  the  ten  horns  belong  still  to 
the  future.  To  be  able  to  judge  regarding  them  with  an.v 
O'rtainty,  we  must  first  make  clear  to  ourselves  the  place  of 
the  Messianic  kingdom  with  reference  to  the  fourth  world- 
kingdom,  and  then  compare  the  prophecy  of  the  .\p0Crtlyp5e 
of  John  regarding  the  formation  of  the  world-power — a  pro- 
phecy which  rest«  on  the  book  of  Daniel."  This  is  a  virtual 
abandonment  of  the  Held.  If  all  the  other  parts  of  this 
prophecy  have  their  clear  counterpart  in  history,  why  not 
this  also  ?  If,  as  Keil  claims,  these  ten  horns  are  found 
simultaneously  on  the  head  of  the  beast  as  it  fii-st  arises  it 
is  obviously  inconsistent  to  refer  their  identification  to  the 
future.  But  the  attempts  made  to  distingui.sh  the  horns  in 
question,  in  their  literal  applicatioi  Rome,  have  signally 
failed,  as  the  must  cursory  inspection  of  the  schemes  proposed 
in  vari<'us  commentar.es  on  Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse 
will  abundantly  show.  The  ten  kings  in  Rev.  xvii.  'A  art 
there  expreasly  assigned  to  the  indefinite  future  :  but  the 
seven  in  ver.  10  are  clearly  chantcterized  as  lielonging  to 
proximate  history,  and  the  first  six  as  bavintf  been  at  the 
time  actually  realized.] 


ItJfi 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


satisfactory  comparison  with  the  periods  of  re- 
ligious persecution  under  Antiochus  and  of  the 
Jlaccaba'au  revolt.  If  the  introduction  of  a 
sacrificial  worship  and  the  erection  of  an  altar 
to  the  Ol.ympic  Zeus  by  Antiochus  ( 1  Maco.  i. 
•54 1  be  taken  as  the  terminus  a  quo,  and  the  re- 
dedication  of  the  desecrated  sanctuary  by  Judas 
Maccabfeus  (1  Mace.  iv.  52)  as  the  term  in  us  ad 
quern  of  that  period  of  suffering,  the  result  is 
merely  three  years  and  ten  days,  instead  of 
three  and  a  half  years  (cf.  Josephus.  Ant.  XII. 
7,  6) ;  for  the  llaccabEean  books  fix  the  date  of 
the  former  event  on  the  1.5th  Chisleu  of  the 
year  14.5  of  the  ^ra  of  the  Seleucidfe  (=  B.  C. 
16")  and  of  the  latter  on  the  2.5th  Chisleu  148 
te.  Sel.  (B.  C.  104).  Hitzig  attempts  unsuccess- 
fully to  recover  the  five  and  two  third  months 
yet  lacking  by  going  back  to  the  arrival  in  Judasa 
of  AppoUonius,  the  commissioner  of  tribute 
(which  he  asserts  must  have  happened  about 
three  months  before  the  1.5th  Chisleu  145,  ac- 
cording to  1  JIacc.  i.  29  [cf.  v.  19]).  as  the  ac- 
tual commencement  of  the  sera  of  persecution. 
The  result  is  still  only  three  and  a  fourth 
years  instead  of  the  requisite  three  and  a  half ; 
and  a  yet  more  unfortunate  feature,  which  in- 
creases the  difiiculty  of  settling  both  the  begin- 
ning and  the  end  of  the  epoch  of  three  and  a  half 
years  in  question,  appears  in  the  two-fold  con- 
sideration, that  on  the  one  hand  the  real  begin- 
ning of  the  Maccabsean  persecution  may  be  found 
in  the  barbarous  attack  on  the  life  and  religion 
of  the  Jews,  which,  according  to  1  Mace.  i.  22, 
took  place  fully  "ix  years  prior  to  the  re-dedica- 
tion of  the  temple,  while  on  the  other  hand  it  is 
by  no  means  necessary  to  regard  the  dedication 
of  the  sanctuary  on  the  2oth  Chisleu  148  as 
marking  the  cessation  of  the  persecution,  which 
might  rather  be  dated  from  the  great  victories  of 
Judas  Maccaba3us  over  the  Syrian  generals  Gorgias 
and  Lysias  ( the  one  of  which  was  gained  during 
the  year  14T.  and  the  other  in  the  earlier  months 
of  148  in  the  asra  of  the  Seleucidai),  or  on  the  con- 
trary, from  some  event  subsequent  to  the  dedi- 
cation, as  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (cf. 
infra,  on  chap.  xii.  lit.  The  theories  which  are 
admissible,  therefore,  vacillate  between  periods 
covering  from  three  to  six  years,  without  being 
able,  in  any  case,  to  demonstrate  an  a;ra  of  exactly 
three  and  a  half  years,  such  as  v.  35  requires,  and 
further,  without  presenting  any  evidence  from 
the  recorded  history  of  the  Maccabees  of  so  sud- 
den, complete,  and  wonderful  a  conclusion  of  the 
period  of  suffering  (without  being  secured  by  re- 
peated conflicts  and  successes),  as  the  same  pas- 
sage and  its  par.allels  in  chap.  viiL  14  and  chap, 
xii.  7  et  seq.  seem  to  require.  *   For  this  reason 


*  [In  this  chronological  exanlination  the  author  does  in- 
justice to  the  data  in  question.  a.s  the  following  exhibit  from 
Stuart's  Cnmmentary  (p.  2'2;J)  will  render  clear:  *' Is  this 
expressi'in  of  time  poetical  merely  and  figurative,  cousi.stirg 
of  round  numbers  (as  tliey  say),  and  comprising  jnst  half  of 
the  myotic  d  number  xepen..  which  is  so  often  employed  in  a 
kind  of  tropical  way  ?  Ui>,toriC'ilfartx  seem  to  speak  for  the 
liliral  interpretation,  in  the  Ijook  before  us.  Yet,  consider- 
ing the  nature  of  the  case  and  of  the  number  usually  con- 
cerned with  such  reckonings  {i.e.,  the  number  seven),  we 
surely  need  not  be  solicitous  abont.ji  day,  a  week,  or  even  a 
month,  more  or  less.  The  convenience  of  the  reckoning, 
when  it  is  Dear  enough  to  exactnes-s  for  all  the  punw&es  of 
prophecy,  is  very  obvious,  and  will  account  for  adopting  it. 

■•  III  exhibiting  rhe  historical  facts,  we  will  begin  with  an 
(era  which  is  ccrtam.  viz.,  the  time  when  Judas  Mace,  cxpur- 
rated  the  t^-mple,  and  began  the  service  of  (Jod  anew.  This 
was  on  the  25th  of  Dec.  148  ann.  Sel.  -  llt.'i  B.C.,  see  1  Mace. 


:  we  are  sometimes  referred  to  the  alleged  in- 
.  sufficiency  of  our  information  respecting  the 
!  various  events  connected  with  the  MaccabteaQ 
i  history,  which  lacks  certainty  and  thoroughness 
[  (Hilgenfeld,  as  above),  and  at  others,  the  as- 
sumption has  been  adopted  that  the  Maccabaean 
tendency-writer  employed  a  designedly  mystical 
and  indefinite  mode  of  indicating  time,  which 
cannot  be  accurately  elucidated  by  a  comparison 
with  the  facts  of  history  (Von  Lengerke).  How- 
ever conceivable  and  in  itself  probable  the  latter 
view  may  be,  on  the  opinion  that  the  prophet 
was  drawing  an  apocalyptic  picture  of  the  dis- 
tant future,  which  was  necessarily  ideal  and  in- 
definite so  far  as  details  were  concerned,  it  is  tc 
the  same  degree  improbable  and  incapable  of  be- 
ing demonstrated,  when  the  author  is  regarded 
as  a  conventional  inventor  of  riiticiiiia  ex  eventu, 
who  everywhere  attempts  to  introduce  aUusione 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  recent  past  or  of  the 
present.  From  such  a  writer  we  might  as- 
suredly have  expected  .a  more  exact  agreement 
and  palpable  correspondence  between  the  proph- 
ecy and  its  fulfilling  counterpart  than  results 
from  the  relation  of  the  1  -i-  2  -f  i  times  to  the 
period  of  the  Antiochian  persecution.  "  The  al- 
leged pseudo-composer  of  our  chapter  must  ac- 
cordingly have  written  for  a  time,  with  whose 
historical  conditions  he  was  unacquainted,  de- 
s-pite  the  fact  that  he  was  its  mntemporfcri/  ;  and 
the  entire  condition  of  the  theocracy,  covered 
with  sh.ame  and  the  want  of  success  a*  it  was, 
during  the  three  and  a  half  years  of  this  chaptei 
— before  whose  expiration  this  advocate  of  the 
actually  victorious  but  not  by  him  so-designated 
Maccabiean  rebellion  is  said  to  have  written — 
becomes  historically  inconceivable  in  the  light 
of  the  pseudo  -  Daniel  tendency  -  hypothesis  " 
(Kranichfeldj. 


iv.  52.  Counting  back  three  and  a  half  years,  we  come  tc 
June  in  145  A.S.  =168  B.C.  Livy  has  described  the  retreat 
of  Antiochus  from  Egypt,  in  the  earl//  spring  {' prime 
vere,'  Liv.  xlv.  11)  of  that  year.  While  on  that  retreat, 
Antiochus  detached  ApoUonius,  one  of  his  military  chieftains; 
to  lay  waste  Jerusalem  (comp.  2  Mace,  v.  11,  which  makea 
the  time  clearj,  for  he  had  heard  that  the  Jews  exulted  at 
his  misfortune,  in  being  obliged  by  the  Romans  to  retreat 
from  Egypt,  and  he  was  determined  to  wreak  his  vengeance 
on  them.  He  did  so  effectually,  as  1  Mace.  i.  29  seq,  fully 
shows;  and  vs.  29,  20,  of  the  same  chapter,  compared  to- 
gether, show  that  the  year  was  145  A.  S.  as  above  stated. 
From  .Tune,  when  Jemsalera  was  proliably  taken,  to  Decem- 
ber, is  six  months ;  and  fr^  tm  December  in  168  to  December, 
165,  is  three  years.  In  the  same  way.  as  to  time,  does  Jo. 
sephus  reckon  I'l-'Wi.  ad  Bell.  Jud.  §  7.  But  to  avoid  per- 
plexity, it  should  be  noted  that  a  different  mode  of  reckon- 
ing, viz.,  three  year«,  is  sometimes  employed,  e,fj.,  in  1  Mace, 
iv.  54,  and  2  Mace,  x,  5,  such  a  method  seems  to  be  implied  ; 
and  so  in  Jos.,  Ant.  Jud.  XII.  7,  6.  An  examination  of  the 
context  in  these  cases  sttows,  however,  that  this  period  de- 
signates only  the  time  that  intervened  t>elween  the  profana- 
tion of  the  temple  by  heathen  .sacrifices,  1  Mace.  i.  54.  and 
the  consecr.ttion  of  it  by  Judas  Maccaboeu-s,  1  Mace.  iv.  54. 
Some  six  months  after  capture  of  the  city,  during  which  .all 
manner  of  cruelties  and  excesses  were  committed,  appear  to 
have  elapsed  before  .\ntiochns  began  his  sicininh  offerings 
in  the  temple.  The  consecration  of  the  temple  by  Judas  in- 
troduced regular  Hebrew  worship  there  :  and  the  death  of 
Antiochus  happening  shortly  afterward,  the  period  of  his  op- 
pression was  of  course  at  its  end.  Thus  did  events  corre- 
spond ver,v  exactly  with  the  time  designated  in  our  text.  We 
cannot  indeed  sjiecify  the  exact  day,  because  history  has  not 
done  this ;  but  it  is  enough,  that  we  come  so  near  to  the 
time  designated,  as  to  remove  all  serious  difficulty  respecting 
it." 

To  this  we  may  add  that  the  period  three  and  a  half  year? 
may  reasonably  iie  taken  its  a  somewhat  round  numt>er,  not 
only  ttecause  of  its  being  in  it-self  a  general  and  inexa'.-t  er- 
pression.  but  more  especially  as  liemg  the  half  of  the  coa 
ventional  term  of  seven  years.     See  on  ch.  ix.  37.1 


CHAP.  VII.  1-28. 


167 


e.  Intimately  connected  with  this  is  the  dis- 
crepancy between  the  picture  of  the  Messiah 
drawn  in  our  chapter,  and  the  nature  of  the 
Messianic  hopes  entertained  by  the  Jews  of  the 
MaccabEean  period,  as  revealed  in  the  books  of 
the  Maccabees,  and  also  in  the  other  products  of 
Jewish  apocalyptic  Uterature  of  nearly  the  same 
date.  These  authorities  are  indeed  able  to  refer 
to  a  final  deliverance  and  re-union  of  the  scat- 
tered tribes  of  Israel  (see,  e.g.,  Ecclus.  xxs.  11 ; 
1.  24 ;  Tob.  xiii.  13-18  ;  xiv.  6),  and  also  to  a 
Divine  visitation  of  judgment  upon  the  heathen 
(Ecclus.  xxxii.  18;  Judith  xvi.  17,  etc.);  but 
they  nowhere  base  their  theocratic  expectations 
clearly  on  tbe  appearance  of  a  single  Messianic 
personage,  least  of  all,  on  one  who  is  so  positively 
characterized  by  traits  belonging  to  both  Divine 
and  human  nature  as  is  the  "  Son  of  man  "  in  v. 
I'd  of  this  chapter.  The  -/joi?»/-?/f  -laro^  of  1 
Mace.  (xiv.  41 )  is  a  purely  human  prophet,  de- 
void of  aU  celestial,  supernatural  character ;  and 
the  "  poor  righteous  one  "  of  the  book  of  ^\  isdom 
(chap.  ii.  10-20)  can  make  no  claim  to  recognition 
as  an  individual  Messianic  person,  but  is  rather 
a  mere  personification  of  the  class  of  suffering 
righteous  men.  The  conception  of  a  Messiah  is 
very  dim  upon  the  whole  in  all  the  apocryphal 
literature  of  the  two  centuries  immediately  pre- 
ceding the  Christian  Eera;  and  in  the  cases, 
where  the  expectation  of  a  personal  Messiah, 
possessed  of  the  Divine-human  character  to  a 
greater  or  less  degree,  actually  appears  in  several 
productions  of  this  period,  as  in  books  II.  and  III. 
of  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  or  in  the  book  of  Enoch 
( which  at  least  some  critics  admit  to  have  been 
composed  as  early  as  in  the  second  century  B.  C, 
and  possibly  under  John  Hyrcanus — ey.,  Ewald, 
Dillraann,  Jos.  Langen),  the  dependence  of  such 
writings  on  this  book  must  doubtless  be  assumed 
(cf.  the  passage  from  the  Ornc.  Siltyll.  1.  II., 
cited  above,  on  v.  8,  and  also  Introd.  ^  G,  note 
3).  This  dependence,  however,  in  no  wise  com- 
pels to  the  assumption  that  the  prophecies  of 
Daniel  originated  in  the  Asmonaean  period  ;  it 
is  far  more  readily  understood  on  the  opinion 
that  they  originated  during  the  captivity,  but 
that  they  were  recognized  at  their  true  value  and 
introduced  into  general  use  iji  all  the  circles  of 
pious  Jewish  apocalyptists  ld  the  Maccabajan  age 
and  as  a  result  of  its  attlictions. 

4.  In  support  of  the  opinion  that  He  who 
''  came  with  the  clouds  of  heaven ''  in  v.  13  is  no 
other  than  the  penotud  Messiah,  it  has  already 
been  remarked  among  other  things  (see  on  that 
passage)  that  Christ  preferably  and  frequently 
employed  the  phrase  o  7'^)^-  mv  ai^dpij-nv,  as  a 
testimony  in  favor  of  that  view.  It  is  now  re- 
cognized by  a  majority  of  expositors  and  Biblical 
theologians  that  this  designation,  which  is  found 
in  all  eighty-onetimes  in  the  New  Testament,  was 
intended  to  recall  Dan.  vii.  13,  and  to  assert  the 
identity  of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  with  the  "3 
1C:S<  who  is  there  described,  although  several 
(e.g..  Von  Hofmann,  Delitzsch.  Kahnis,  etc.)  still 
attempt  to  advocate  the  view  formerly  repre- 
sented by  Huetius,  Harduin,  Schleiermacher, 
Neander.  Weisse,  Baur,  etc.,  on  which  the  phrase 
was  derived  from  Psa.  viii.  5,  and  designates 
Jesns,  not  as  being  the  Messiah,  but  as  "  the 
flower  of  humanity."  as  "the  ideal  and  normal 
man,"  the   "man  of  history,  toward  whom  all 


human  development  tends."  The  former  method 
of  explaining  the  phrase  does  not  exclude  the 
latter,  but  is  rather  to  be  traced  back  to  both 
these  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  inasmuch 
as  Dan.  vii.  13  also  expresses  the  sense  of  tha 
ideal  and  normally  human,  of  the  perfectly  hu- 
man, and  even  of  the  Diciiie  human,  as  will 
appear  with  special  clearness  from  the  manner 
in  which  the  Saviour,  in  Matt.  xxvi.  64,  repliec  to 
the  question  of  the  High  priest  inquiring  whether 
He  were  "the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,"  when, 
with  an  evident  allusion  to  this  passage.  He  de- 
clares Himself  "the  Son  of  man,"  who  shall 
thereafter  be  seen  sitting  "  on  the  right  hand  of 
power  and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  ;"  cf. 
also  John  xii,  35,  3(i,  where  in  answer  to  the 
question  of  the  unbelieving  people,  "Who  is 
this  Son  of  man?"  the  Lord  declares.  "Yet 
a  little  while  is  the  light  with  you,"  and  thus 
again  identifies  himself  most  clearly  with  the 
Messianic  ' '  Son  of  man  "  of  this  passage.  Cf . 
Me.ver  and  Lange  on  both  these  passages  (and 
also  on  Matt,  %-iii.  20)  ;  likewise  Gess,  Lehre  vou 
cler  Person  Christi  (1850)  p.  7  et  seq.,  2o7;  J.P 
Tafel,  Leben  Jesii,  p.  127  et  seq. ,  and  especially 
Nebe,  Uebcr  den  Begriff  des  JWimens  v  or  vim 
df<iliili~(n;  Herbom,  18(J0 ;  also  Holtzraann, 
Ueber  den  neuteMamentUchen  Ausdrvck  Men- 
scliensnhn,  in  Hilgenfeld's  Zeitschr.  f.  wissen- 
schaftlichc  Theologie,  1805,  p.  212  et  seq.  (al- 
though the  latter  has  .so  distorted  a  view  of  the 
reference  of  the  name  to  Dan.  vii.  13  that  he 
chooses  to  entirely  exclude  that  to  Psa.  viii.  5, 
thus  approaching  the  opinion  advocated  by 
Strauss  in  his  Lcben  Jesti). — In  addition  to  this 
reference  to  our  passage  in  the  mouth  of  our 
Lord  as  directlj-  testifying  to  a  personal  Messiah, 
and  besides  the  possibly  still  more  ancient  refer- 
ences in  the  same  spirit  which  are  found  in  the 
Sibyllines  and  the  book  of  Enoch  (see  supra),  the 
substantial  agreement  of  its  description  of  Christ 
with  that  of  the  prophets  prior  to  the  captivity 
affords  an  important  testimony  in  favor  of  the 
correctness  of  our  view.  E.specially  if  the  de- 
scription of  the  "Sou  of  man"  in  chap.  vii.  13 
et  seq.,  to  whom  an  eternal  and  all-embracing 

dominion  over  all  nations  is  given,  be  compared 
with  the  de.signation  T^j  rf— ^,  "an  anointe<3 
prince,"  in  chap.  ix.  2G,  which,  although  prim- 
arily applicable  to  a  typical  forerunner  of  Christ 
(see  on  that  passage),  yet  clearly  indicates  tha 
character  of  the  Messianic  ruler  as  being  at  tha 
same  time  priest  and  king,  the  result  will  be  a 
demonstration  of  the  close  analogy  and  even 
identity  of  Daniel's  description  of  the  Messiah 
with  those  by  which  Isaiah  (chap.  ix.  5 ;  xi.  1 
et  seq. )  and   his  contemporary,  Micah  (chap.  v. 

I  et  seq.),  characterize  the  spiritually  anointed 
ruler  of  the  house  of  David  who  should  intro- 
duce the  period  of  the  deliverance  of  Israel  and 
all  nations,  and  also  with  the  Messianic  proph- 
ecies of  Jeremiah  (xxiii.  5;  xxx.  0;  .and  Ezekiel 
(xxxiv.  23  ;  xxxvii.  25)  and  even  those  of  the 
time  of  David  and  Solomon  together  with  the 
period  immediateh'  subsequent,  e.g.,  David  him- 
self (Psa.  ex.),  Nathan  (2  Sam.  vii.),  Amos  (ix. 

II  et  seq.),  Ho.sea  (iii.  5),  etc.  The  Messiah  of 
Daniel  does  not  differ  from  Him  to  whom  all  tho 
earlier  prophets  bore  witness  ;  the  super-huraau 
glory  and  perfection  of  power  of  Him  who  never- 
theless appears  in  human  form,  as  described  in 


168 


THK  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


this  vision,  correspond  exactly  to  the  expecta- 
tions which  the  prophetism  of  Israel  in  general, 
from  the  time  of  David,  when  the  theocracy 
bloomed  and  shone  in  its  splendor,  had  learned 
to  connect  with  a  later  offspring  of  the  house  of 
David,  as  the  restorer,  endowed  with  Divine 
power  and  majesty,  who  should  renew  the  glory 
jf  that  house,  and  consequently  the  glory  of  the 
theocracy  as  a  whole. 

5.  For  the  purpose  of  a  practical  homiletical 
treatment  of  the  chapter  it  will  of  course  be 
necessary  to  pay  special  regard  to  the  shining 
clearness  of  this  description  of  the  Messiah,  and 
through  it  to  clear  up  the  more  obscure  features 
of  the  prophetic  vision,  in  so  far  as  this  may  be 
possible  and  of  practical  utility.  The  Divine- 
human  Messiah  of  Israel,  the  founder  and  ruler 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the  earth,  the  Saviour 
and  Judge  of  the  world  (cf,  John  iv.  42 ;  v.  27), 
is  to  be  described  in  His  relations  toward  the 
earthly  world-power,  which,  passing  through 
various  forms  and  phases  of  development,  finally 
reaches  the  diabolical  rage  of  anti-Christianity, 
and  rebels  against  Him  ;  and  his  ultimate  triumph 
over  all  His  foes  is  to  be  displayed  as  a  necessity, 
founded  in  the  Divine  economy  of  salvation.  In 
this  connection  it  will  not  be  wise  to  enter  upon 
a  consideration  of  those  phases  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  world-power,  symbolized  by  the 
figure  of  the  beasts,  in  their  relation  to  the  pre- 
Christian  world-monarchies  which  are  to  be  re- 
garded as  their  historical  counterparts,  any 
farther  than  is  imperatively  necessary  for  the 
purpose  of  clearness.  The  ideal  and  funda- 
mental thought  of  the  prophecy,  which  substan- 
tially coincides  with  that  of  the  image  of  the 
monarchies  in  chap.  II.  and  may  be  expressed 
by  the  statement  "  that  all  the  kingdoms  of  the 
earth  must  be  put  to  shame"  (cf.  Rev.  xi.  15; 
xii.  10)  before  the  kingdom  of  the  everlasting 
God  (the  Ancient  of  days,  v.  9),  and  of  His  An- 
ointed, must  evidently  be  made  prominent ;  but 
the  details  of  its  realization  in  the  history  of  the 
world  should  receive  only  a  subordinate  atten- 
tion, especially  since  none  of  the  theories  pro- 
mulgated to  the  present  time,  which  undertake 
to  specify  the  particular  kingdoms  designated 
by  the  four  beasts,  can  claim  to  be  absolutely 
correct,  and  recourse  must  therefore  be  had  to 
a  choice  between  probabilities,  or  between  inter- 
pretations, more  or  less  plausible,  of  the  mys- 
terious hieroglyphic  animal  figures  that  "  came 
up  from  the  sea."  For  as  merely  the  forms  of 
the  future  world-monarchies  were  revealed  to 
the  prophet — sometimes  indeed  in  surprisingly 
definite  and  exact  outlines — but  he  was  not  made 
acquainted  with  their  names ;  as  their  nature, 
but  not  their  historic  appearance  was  prefigured 
to  him  :  so  can  no  effort  of  scientific  penetration 
on  the  part  of  exegetes  succeed  in  establishing 
an  exact  correspondence  between  the  character 
of  these  monarchies,  as  shadowed  forth  in  pro- 
phetic images,  and  its  actualization  in  the  surg- 
ing confusion  of  the  life  of  nations  during  the 
course  of  the  last  pre-Christian  century,  and  thus 
in  stating,  with  mathematical  exactness  and  cer- 
tainty, which  great  world-kingdom  subsequent 
to  the  captivity  was  intended  by  the  Spirit  of 
prophecy  by  each  of  the  beasts  seen  by  Daniel, 
what  kings  were  represented  by  the  ten  horns  of 
the  fourth  beast,  what  was  the  precise  concep- 
tion of  the  blasphemous  course  and  anti-theo- 


cratic rage  of  the  last  horn,  and  whether,  ib 
point  of  fact,  Antiochus  Epiphanes  conformed 
to  it  in  all  respects,  or  merely  realized  it  gener- 
ally and  in  substance.  In  view  of  these  unavoid 
able  obscurities  and  difficulties,  the  practical  ex- 
positor, still  more  than  the  scientific  exegete,  ia 
limited  to  a  chaste,  modest,  and  reserved  course 
in  the  treatment  of  this  prophecy  as  it  applici 
to  the  history  of  nations  and  of  the  world.  In- 
stead of  pursuing  to  particulars  the  interprwta- 
tion  of  the  series  of  monarchies  in  vs.  4-T,  oi 
even  of  the  succession  of  kings  in  v.  8,  in  tbn  de- 
tails of  history,  he  will  be  able  to  present  onlj 
examples  of  the  wonderfully  exact  correypond- 
ence  between  the  type  and  its  histories  i  anti- 
type, or  illustrative  proofs  of  the  generally  un- 
questionable congruity  between  the  visional  and 
the  actual  succession  of  monarchies  ;  and  espe- 
cially, instead  of  treating  the  fourth  beast  and 
its  eleventh  horn  (in  which  the  idea  of  the 
fourth  beast  attains  its  complete  development, 
and  which  may,  therefore,  to  a  certain  extent, 
be  identified  with  the  beast  itself)  as  referring 
solely  to  the  anti-Christian  world-power  in  pre- 
Christian  times,  or  also  to  the  Roman  supremacy 
with  Herod  or  Nero  as  the  representative  of  ita 
anti-Christian  character  *  —  which  would  be 
wholly  impractical  and  a  grave  offence  against  all 
the  rules  of  sound  homUetics  ; — inste.id  of  so 
one-sided  an  Old-Testament  or  typical  interpreta- 
tion of  this  beast,  he  will  doubtless  be  obliged  to 
deal  prominently  with  that  more  unfettered, 
spiritual,  and  ideal  mode  of  treatment,  by  which 
the  fourth  beast  represents  at  the  same  time 
both  type  and  antitype,  thus  including  the  world- 
power  of  the  last  times,  which  is  inimical  to 
God  and  Christ.  Here  also  every  one-sided  in- 
terpretation, centring  in  a  definite  point  of  the 
history  of  the  past,  must  be  avoided,  and  the 
antichrist  must  not  be  found  specifically  in  the 
Turkish  nation  (so  Luther.  Vun-ede  iiber  den 
Proph.  Daniel ;  Melancthon  in  the  Kortimtntar^ 
where,  however,  he  also  associates  the  pope ; 
Calov.  ;  M.  Geier,  etc.),  nor  in  the  pope  (Luther 
in  his  exposition  of  chap,  xl  and  xii.  and  else- 
where ftequently ;  also  Brentius,  Calvin,  Zan- 
chius,  Cocceius,  Buddeus,  Bengel,  Roos,  and  re- 
cently, F.  Brunn,  in  the  little  work,  1st  der 
Pabst  der  Antichrist?  Dresden,  1868),  nor  in  Na- 
poleon L  or  III.  (cf.  Leutwein,  JJas  Thier  war 
und  ist  nicht,  etc.,  Ludwigsburg,  1825),  nor, 
most  remarkable  of  all,  in  Count  Bismarck 
as  representing  the  Prussian  State  (thus,  e.g., 
Groen  van  Priesterer ;  many  clergymen  of 
Wiirtemberg  in  the  year  18(i6,  etc.),  but  his 
eschatological  character  as  belonging  to  the 
final  stage  of  mundane  history  must  be  retained. 
Cf .  Liinemann,  on  2  Thess.  ii. ,  p.  204  et  seq.  ; 
Auberlen  and  Rif^enbach  on  the  same  chapter, 
p.  117  etseq.  ;  H.  0.  Kohler,  IHe  Schriftwid- 
rigkeit  (fes  Chiliasmus,  in  Guericke's  Zeitschr.  fiXr 
die  hith.  Thed.  und  Kirehe,  1861,  No.  ni.,  p. 
459  et  seq.  ^where  the  numeroiis  writers  in  the 
Middle  Ages  are  mentioned,  who  declared  the 
pope  to  be  the  antichrist,  e.g.,  bishop  Arnulf  of 
Orleans,  991;  Honorius  of  Autun;  John  of 
Salisbury ;  Joachim  v.  Floris ;  Robert  Gross- 
head;  Job.  Milicz;  Matth.  v.  Janow;  Gregory 
of  Heimburg  ;  the  Waldenses  ;  many  Hussites, 


*  Thus,  e.g.,  Bectanann,  ifeditaUones  poMIca,  c.  86,  »nd 
Koch  (in  Starke,  on  v.  8). 


CHAP.  VIII.  1-27. 


16& 


et);  S.  Baring  Gould,  Carious  Mythi  of  the 
Middle  Ayes,  London,  1806  (chap.  9,  the  Anti- 
christ) ;  H.  W.  Rinck,  Die  Lehre  der  MtUigen 
Hc/irift  vom  Antichrist,  rait  Beriickdchtigung  der 
Zeichen  unserer  Zeit.  Elberfeld,  18G7  [and  many 
of  the  monographs  cited  at  the  close  of  the  In- 
troduction] . 

Since  but  few  of  the  practical  expositors  of 
former  times  occupy  the  ground  of  this  more 
free  and  spiritual  iuterpretatiou,  but  rather  are 
generally  concerned  to  adapt  the  visions  of  the 
prophet  to  special  events  and  appearances  in 
modern  history,  or  confine  themselves  to  the 
work  of  disproving  the  interpretation  which  as- 
sumes that  the  chap,  was  a  vatic,  ex  eeentii, 
written  by  a  pretended  Daniel  in  the  Maccaba^an 
period  (so  many  church  fathers,  e.g.,  Jerorae, 
whose  observations  on  this  section  aim  solely  to 
resist  the  tendency-critical  attacks  of  Por- 
phyry ;  among  modems,  e.g.,  Hiivemick),  a 
thoroughly  proper  practical  and  homiletical 
treatment  of  the  chapter,  based  on  a  solid  exe- 
getical  foundation,  can  of  course  derive  but 
little  benefit  from  them.  Nevertheless,  we  quote 
several  observations  on  the  more  important  pas- 
sages. 

On  vs.  4-8,  Meiancthon  :  "  MirabiU  Dei  con- 
silio  et  voluntate  Ecdesia  subjecta  est  cruei.  .  . 
.  .  Pradicunt  Frop/ieta  et  ApostoU,  muhdum 
panas  daturum  esse,  quud  post  sparsum  erau- 
geliurn  tj/rannisceriant  in  membra  Christi,  dcinde 
et  ab  iUis  ipsis  gtii  gubernant  Ectlesiam,  poUitta 
sit  Ecdesia  idplui,  falsis  dogmatibm,  paricidiis 
sanctontmlibidinibus."  {To  this,  however,  is  added 
the  one-sided  and  arbitrary  remark,  "  Est  ex  his 
leminibus  ortam  essepestain  MalMineticam  historia 


ostendit.")  On  v.  9,  Calvin  :  •' Sciamus  lion  posst 
a  nobis  Deum  conspici  qualis  est,  donee simus plane 
similes  ei.  .  .  .  Deus  certe  neque  solimn  aliquud 
occupat,  nequ^  rotis  vehitur.  sed  nun  debemus  im- 
aginnri  Deum  in  sua  essentia  talem  esse,  qunlii 
propheta  suo  et  aiiis  Sanctis  patribus  apparuit  / 
sed  iuduit  subinde  varias  fonniis  pro  captu  Iwrai- 
num.  quibus prdsentiee  siue  aliquod  sig?ivm  dare 
volebat," 

On  vs.  11,  13,  the  Tubinger  Bibel :  "In  Hia 
eternal  decree  God  has  fixea  a  limit  to  every 
kingdom  ;  beyond  this  it  cannot  go,  and  the 
Divine  providence  exerts  a  special  agency  to  this 
end  (Isa.  .xxiii.  15)." 

On  V.  13  et  seq. ,  Luther  (  Von  den  letzten  Wor- 
ten  DaHds,  in  his  Werke,  vol.  XXXI.  p.  30  et 
seq. )  :  "  This  eternity  or  eternal  kingdom  cannot 
be  given  to  any  evil  creature,  whether  man  or 
angel ;  for  it  is  the  power  of  God,  and  of  God 
Himself.  .  .  .  Namely,  the  Father  confers  the 
everlasting  power  on  the  Son,  and  the  Son  re- 
ceives it  from  the  Father,  and  all  this  from  all 
eternity.  .  .  At  the  same  time,  the  Son  is  also  a 
child,  i.e.,  a  real  man  and  the  Son  of  Da^d,  to 
whom  such  eternal  power  is  given.  Thus  we  see 
how  the  prophets  properly  regarded  and  under- 
stood the  word  '  eternal, '  when  God  says  to 
David  by  the  mouth  of  Nathan.  '  I  will  place  my 
and  thy  son  in  my  eternal  kingdom '  (3  Sam.  vii. 
13,  16)." 

On  V.  25,  Starke :  "  WTien  crowned  heads 
assail  God  with  impious  hands,  and  are  not  con- 
tent with  the  honor  of  earthly  gods,  their  re- 
spect and  honor,  dominion  and  glory,  are  taken 
from  them  by  a  common  stroke ;  cf.  Acts  xii. 
23  et  seq." 


2.   The  vision  of  the  ttoo  loorld-kingdoms  and  their  faU. 
Chap.  VIII.  1-27. 


1  In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  king  Belsliazzar  a  vision  ai^peared  unto  me, 

2  even  unto  me  [I]  Daniel,  after  tiiat  lohich  appeared  unto  me  at  the  first.  xVnd  I 
saw  in  a  vision  (and  it  came  to  pass,  when  1  saw,  that  I  icas  at  [in]  &husl\an  in 
the  palace  [or,  citadel],  which  is  in  the  province  o/'Elam)  ;  and  I  saw  in  a  vision, 
and  I  was  by  [upon]  the  river  of  Ulai. 

3  Then  [And]  I  lifted  up  mine  eyes  and  saw,  and,  behold,  there  stood  before  the 
river  a  [single]  ram  which  [and  he]  had  two  horns,  and  the  two  horns  were  high  ; 

4  but  [the]  one  was  higher  tlian  the  other,  and  the  higher  came  up  last.  I  saw 
the  ram  pushing"  westward  [sea-ward],  and  northward,  and  southward;  so  that 
[and]  no  beasts  might  [could]  stand  before  him,  neither  was  there  any  that  could 
deliver  out  of  his  hand  ;  but  [and]  he  did  according  to  his  will,  and  became 
great.' 

5  And  a.s  I  was  considering  [then],  behold,  a  he-goat'  came  from  the  west,'  on 
the  face  of  the  whole  earth,  and  tonched  not  the  ground  [earth]  :  and  the  goat 

6  Juid  a  notable  [sightly]  horn  between  his  eyes.  And  he  came  to  the  ram  that 
had  [master  of  the]  two  horns,  which  I  had  seen  standing  before  the  river,  and 

7  ran  unto  him  in  the  fury  of  his  power.  And  I  saw  him  come  close  unto  °  the 
ram,  and  he  was  moved  with  choler '  against  [towards]  him,  and  smote  the  ram, 
and  brake  his  two  horns ;  and  there  was  no  power  in  the  ram  to  stand  before 
him,  but  he  cast  him  down  to  the  ground  [earth],  and  stamped  ujwn  [trampled] 
him:  and  there  was  none  that  cjiild  deliver'  the  ram  out  of  his  hand. 


170  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


8  Therefore  [And]  the  he-goat*  waxed  [became]  very'  great:'  and  when  fas! 
he  was  strong,  the  great  horn  was  broken  ;   and  for  it  came  up  four  notable 

9  [sightly]  ones,"  toward  the  four  winds  of  heaven  [the  lieavens].  And  out  of  [the 
one  of  them  came  forth  a  [single]  little  "  horn  which  waxed  [and  it  became 
exceeding  great/  toward  the  south,  and  toward  the  east  and  toward  the  pleasant 

10  land.'-  And  it  waxed  [became]  great,'  even  to  </je  host  of  heaven  [the  heavens]  : 
and  it  cast  down  "  some  of  the  host  and  of  the  stars  to  the  ground  [earth],  and 

11  stamped  ii2)on  [trampled]  thum.  Yea  [And]  he  magnified  himself  even  to  tht 
prince  of  the  host,  and  by  [from]  him   the  daily  [continual]  sacrifice  was  taken 

12  away,"  and  t/ie  place  of  his  sanctuary  was  cast  down.  And  a  host  was  [would 
be]  given  /u')?j  against  the  daily  [continual]  sacrifice  by  reason  o/"[in]  transgression, 
and  it  [would]  cast  dowii  the  truth  to  the  gronnd  [earth]  ;  and  it  practised  [did], 
and  prospered. 

13  Then  [And]  I  [quite]  heard  one  saint  [holy  one]  speaking,  and  another  saint 
[one  holy  one]  said  unto  that  certain  saint  whicli  spake  [to  so-awrf-so  the  o}ie 
speaking].  How  long  shall  be  the  vision  concerning  \aT\  the  daily  [continual] 
sacrifice,   and  the  transgression  of  desolation   [desolating  or  astounding  trans- 

14  gression],  to  give  both  tlie  sanctuary  and  </iehost  to  he  trodden  underfoot?  And 
lie  said  unto  me,  Unto  two  tliousand  and  three  hundred  days  [evening-mornings] ;" 
then  [and]  shall  the  sanctuary  be  cleansed  [sanctified]. 

15  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  I,  even  I  Daniel,  had  seen  the  vision,  and  sought 
for   the   meaning    [understanding],  then,  behold,  there    stood    before    me  as   the 

16  appearance  of  a  man  [person].  And  I  heard  a  man's  voice  between  thehanhs  of 
Ulai,  which  [and  he]  called,  and  said,  Gabriel,  make  this  man  to  understand  the 

17  vision  [appearance].  So  [And]  he  came  near  where  I  stood;"  and  when  he 
came,  I  was  afraid,  and  fell  [quite]  upon  my  face  :  but  [and]  he  said  unto  me, 
Understand,    O  son   of  man  ;  for  [that]  at  [to]    the  time   of  the  end  shall  he  the 

18  vision.  Now  [And],  as  he  was  speaking  with  me,  I  was  in  a  deep  sleep 
[stunned]  on  my  face  toward  the  ground  [earth] :  but  [and]  he  touched  me,  and 

19  set  me  [made  me  stand]  upright."  And  he  said,  Behold,  1  wtW  make  thee  know 
what  shall  be  in  the  last  end  of  the  indignation  :  for  at  the  time  appointed  the  end 
shall  he  [it  is  to  the  time  oi'  the  end]. 

20  The  ram  which  thou  sawest  having  [master  of  the]  two  horns  are  the  kings  of 

21  Media  and  Persia.  And  the  rough  goat"  is  the  king  of  Gn«cia  [Javan]  ;  and  the 

22  great  horn  that  is  between  his  eyes  [,  that]  is  the  first  king.  Now  that  being 
broken,  whereas  [And  the  broken  one,  and]  four  stood  up  for  it,  four  kingdoms 

2.3  shall  stand  vp  out  of  the  nation,  but  [and]  not  in  his  power.  And  in  the  latter 
time  of  their  kingdom,  when  [as]  the  transgressors  are  come  to  the  full  [have 
completed],  a  king  of  fierce  countenance  [strong  (bold)  of  face],  and  understand- 

24  ing  dark  sentences  [stratagems],  shall  stand  vp.  And  his  power  shall  be 
mighty,  but  not  by  his  o!o?i"power:  and  he  shall  destroy  [or,  corrupt]  wonder- 
fully, and   shall  prosper,  and  practise   [do],  and  shall  destroy   [or,  corrupt]  the 

2.5  mighty   [ones]  and   the  holy  people    [people  of  the  holy  ones].     And  througl 


[upon]  his  policy  also  [and]  he  shall  cause  craft  to  prosper  in  his  hand ;  and  he 
shall  inagnify  himself  m  his  heart,  and  by  peace  [in  security]  shall  destroy  [or, 
corrupt]  many  :    he  shall   also    [and   he   will]   stand  iq)  against  the  Prince  of 

26  princes ;  but  [and]  he  shall  be  broken  without  "  hand.  And  the  vision  [appear- 
ance] of  the  evening  and  the  morning  which  was  told  is  true  [,  it  is  truth]  : 
wherefore  [and  thou]  shut  thou  vp  the  vision  ;  for  it  shall  he  for  many  days. 

27  And  I  Daniel  fainted,"  and  was  sick  certain  days:  afterward  [and]  I  rose  v^), 
and  did  the  king's  business  [work]  ;  and  I  was  astonished  at  the  vision  [appear- 
ance], but  [and]  none  understood  it. 

GRA.MMATICAL    AND    LEXICAL   NOTES. 

[1  T>.—'  njltti  bulling,  as  rams  are  fond  of  doing.—'  i''~3n,  acted  prouaty.—*  Literall.r,  a  teoper  of  the  goan.- 
*  3^7"^.  a  different  term  from  that  used  in  ver.  4,   D'^i  '''«   f^fi.  *■*■.  Mediterranean,  which  here  might  have  been  mi* 

underAtooO  ns  being  literally  the  place  of  origin,  whereas  the  idea  of  direclion  only  is  intended.—"  Literally,  louchtug  the 
i(<Kc/.— '  Literallj-,  inibiuiml  Ulimeif,  I.e.,  waBcxasperated.—"  Literally,  no  de;ic»r«i-/or.—"  Literally,  tUl  txaedingly.— 


CHAP.  VIII.  1-27. 


171 


'I  Literally,  a  fight  jf/ow.—^'  m"32?;,  alminuUon;  the  order  too  is  emphatic,  one  Itom—apeUy  one.—"  '^SH,  tlu 
beaul!/  of  lands.—"  Cav-Kd  to  fall.—"  According  to  the  tejtt  B^ir!)  one  took  awai/.—"  The  original  is  excoedinglj 
laconic  an  J  obsciu-e,  C":~'2  Sl^TI  ™";p1  m- literally,  a  0tJi'nff  niid  the  raiiceKary  a;ui  the  Aos<  n  Ireodi/ig.—"  The 
original  is  very  peculiar,  fill  an  enening.morning,  2300.—"  Literally,  to  the  stile  of  mv  s«niidiii£;.— "Literally,  upon  mi 
Man<fiii£7.— '"Literally.  Aairy  (eaper.-'"  Literally.  loUh  a  cessation  of—"    "'n"'1'n',  S.d.i "' Was  done  up,"  was  oTercome.l 


EXEGETICAL    REMAKKS. 

Verses  1,  2.  Time  and  place  of  the  vhion.  In 
the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  king  Belshaz- 
zar ;  hence,  shortly  before  the  end  of  this  king, 
who  reigned  but  little  more  than  two  years  (cf . 
Introd.,  g  8,  note  ^l,  and  therefore  not  long 
after  the  incident  recorded  in  chap,  v.,  which 
revealed  the  Medo-Persiau  kingdom  already 
rising  with  a  threatening  light  above  the  politi- 
cal horizon  of  the  Chaldtean  empire,  as  the 
heiress  of  Babylonia.  Nebuchadnezzar's  vision 
of  the  image  and  that  of  the  four  beasts  and 
the  Son  of  man  (seen  perhaps  two  years  before 
the  present  datei.  as  well  as  the  vision  of  the 
Medo-Persi.in  ram  and  the  Grecian  goat,  de- 
scribed in  the  following  verses,  had  already  pre- 
pared Daniel,  before  he  interpreted  the  mysteri- 
ous writing  on  the  wall  of  Belshazzar's  banquet- 
hall,  to  see  Medo-Persia  standing  on  the  arena 
of  history  as  the  leading  world-power  instead  of 
Babylonia  in  the  not  distant  future  The  ex- 
tent, however,  to  which  recent  political  events, 
such  as  successes  achieved  by  the  Medes,  or, 
what  is  more  probable,  the  rise  of  the  youthful 
Persian  prince  Cyrus  and  his  victory  over  Asty- 
ages  (B.  C.  ").")9,  and  therefore  two  years  after 
the  death  of  Nebuchadnezzar in.5(il.  and  shortly 
after  the  overthrow  of  his  successor  Belshazzar- 
Evilmerodach),  may  have  been  influential  in  in- 
citing the  prophet  to  the  politico-religious  medi- 
tations from  which  originated  the  vision  of  this 
chapter,  cannot  be  positively  decided,  in  view 
of  the  silence  of  the  book  with  regard  to  such 
externally  conditioning  circumstances.  The 
political  situation  must  certainly  not  be  appre- 
hended as  if  the  fall  of  the  Babylonian  empire 
n-ere  immediately  impending,  and  the  approach 
of  the  Medes  under  Darius  were  looked  for 
shortly.  Against  this  view,  which  is  based  on 
the  familiar  but  incorrect  interpretation  of  chap. 
V.  29  et  seq.,  and  which  is  still  advocated  by 
Hitzig.  Ewald,  etc.,  see  supra,  on  that  passage.* 
— A  vision  appeared  unto  me  .  .  .  Daniel, 
after  that  which  appeared  unto  me  at  the  first; 
i.e.,  "after  having  seen,  somewhat  earlier,  an 
important  prophetic  vision,  another  of  a  similar 
character  appeared  to  me."  This  new  vision, 
however,  is  not  called  a  "  dream  "  or  a  dream- 
vision,  like  that  in  chap.  vii.  1,  but  simply  a 
T'v'i  "  vision,  what  has  been  seen  ;  "  cf.  vs.  15, 
26.  and  also  ns-':  (vs.  16,  27  ;  chap.  x.  7 ;  also 
Ex.  iii.  3 ;  Ezck.  xliii.  3),  which  is  often  substi- 
tuted for  "■"n.  It  is  evident  that  the  prophet 
was  awake  and  conscious  during  this  vision,  from 
the  language  of  the  verses  at  the  beginning  .ind 

•  [If,  howrver,  Rawlinson's  identification  of  Belshazzar 
with  Nabunned'A  son  and  viceroy  be  correct,  the  Medo-Per- 
siail  army  wa-*  at  this  ver\'  time  beeiepnij;?  Babylon,  though 
with  apparently  little  pmspect  of  success:  and  the  fall  of 
the  city  must  have  followed  shortly  after  this  vision.  Hence 
the  first  monmchy,  the  Chaldwan.  is  here  kept  out  of  view, 
fts  il  ^li-eady  a  thiut^  of  the  past,] 


end  of  the  section  (vs.  2  and  27),  and  also  from 
a  comparison  with  the  vision  in  chap.  x. ,  which 
is  analogous  in  form  (see  especially  vs.  7-10). — 
nsn:!!,  mstead  of  "«"'  "wN  li'nri.  On  this 
apparently  relative  use  of  the  article,  cf.  Ewald. 
Lelifb.,  §  335  a. — ni~p3,  properly,  "  in  the  be- 
ginning," is  here  and  in  chap.  ix.  21  equivalent 
to  '■  formerly,  before,"  and  therefore  =  n:r»"'2. 
Isa.  L  26  ;  Gen.  xiii.  3,  4  (in  both  passages  the 
two  terms  are  employed  as  synonyms).  The  ex- 
pression refers  back  to  chap.  vii. ,  and  especially 
to  vii.  28. — Verse  2.  And  I  saiw  in  a  vision; 
and  it  came  to  pass,  when  I  saw,  that  I  was 
at  Shushan  in  the  palace.  T^~r  "'"T  indi- 
cates that  he  iraB  merely  visionally  present  at 
Shushan,  or  that  in  spirit  he  was  transported  to 
that  Persian  metropolis;  but  in  the  following 
words  he  describes  its  situation  and  locality  in 
so  realizing  and  exact  a  manner  that  his  actual 
presence  in  or  near  that  city  becomes  exceed- 
ingly probable.  During  his  long  oflBcial  and 
semi-official  service  under  Nebuchadnezzar  he 
may  have  visited  that  region  more  than  once 
(cf.  supra,  on  iii  12  and  iv.  U).  Like  Josephus. 
a  majority  of  the  older  translators,  Luther,  Gro- 
tius,  etc. ,  Bertholdt  and  Gesenius  advocate  the 
view  that  the  words  beginning  with  "''"I'^l  are  in 
parenthesis ;  but  this  is  contrary  to  the  Heb . 
usage  and  to  the  expression  of  the  author,  and 
consequently  the  view  adopted  by  nearly  all  the 
modern  expositors,  which  finds  only  a  presence 
of  Daniel  ;i'  Tvvcv/jan  at  Shushan  indicated  by 
this  language,  is  preferable.  This  destroys  all 
foundation  for  the  charge  of  Bertholdt,  that  the 
\vriter  is  guilty  of  anachronism  in  this  instance, 
since  Shushan  was  no  longer  subject  to  the  Baby- 
lonian empire  in  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  i.e.. 
Nabonidus.  Even  prior  to  the  fall  of  the  Chal- 
daean  world-power  Daniel  was  able  to  speak  of 
the  palace  (or  castle)  of  Shushan  (with  regard  to 
n"l^3,  Pers.  bdi-u,  "a  castle,"  S.anscr.  bitra,  Gr. 
/W»;f,  cf.  Gesenius  and  Dietrich,  s.  v.)  as  a  cen- 
tre of  Persian  power,  and  ereii,  in  (/measure,  «.s 
t/ie  hcdrt  nf  the  Mcdo-Persinn  world-monarchy. 
because  the  city  of  Susa  (Old-Pers.  probably 
Shiiza,  now  Shush — see  Lassen,  Zeitschr.  fiir 
Kimde  des  Morgenl.,  VI.  47),  together  with  its 
well-fortified  castle,  was,  from  the  earliest  times, 
a  principal  feature  in  the  province  of  Elymais 
(which  is  indicated  by  the  terms  applied  to  it  by 
Herodotxis,  e.g.,  Mf urdrfor  hcrr,  Inina  ra  Me/iv6- 
vn,  etc;  see  Herod.,  V.  53,  .')4  ;  VIL  151;  cf. 
Strabo,  XV.  52  et  seq.  ;  Pausan.,  IV.  31,  5),  and 
because  the  prominent  and  all-controlling  part 
which  that  city  would  take  under  the  direction 
of  a  native  Persian  prince  could  readily  be  fore- 
seen, even  before  Cyrus  should  have  solemnly 
declared  it  the  capital  of  his  empire,  and  before 
Darius  Hystaspis  should  have  enlarged  and 
splendidly  ornamented  it  as  such  (cf.  Havemick, 
on  this  passage). — Which  is  in  the  province  oi 


172 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Elam.  Kranichfeld  Qbserves  correctly  that  "  if 
this  book  had  been  written  subsequent  to  the 
exile,  Shushan  would  not  have  been  located  in 
Elam,  but  in  Susiaua"  (cf.  Fiiller,  p.  190);  for 
Elara  (Gr.  'E'/.vuak-,  Sept.  Ai/iiu)  is  the  old-Heb. 
designation  of  the  countries  situated  east  of 
Babylon  and  the  lower  Tigris,  which  were  in- 
habited from  the  earliest  times  by  Shemites 
(see  Gen.  x.  23;  xiv.  19;  cf.  Isa.  xi.  11  ;  xxi. 
2;  xxiL  6;  Jer.  xxv.  2.5.  etc.),  and  it  was  not 
till  the  period  of  the  Persian  supremacy  that 
the  extended  province  of  Elam  was  limited  to 
the  narrow  strip  between  the  Tigris  and  the 
Euloeus,  or  between  the  Persian  satrapies  of 
Babylonia  and  Susiana,  by  which  arrangement 
the  river  Euloeus  (see  the  notes  immediately 
following)  became  the  boundary  between  Ely- 
mais  and  Susiana,  and  the  city  of  Susa  was 
assigned  to  the  latter  province.  Cf.  Strabo,  XV. 
3,  12;  XVI.  1,  17;  Pliny,  H.  Jf.,  VI.  27:  Su- 
fianam  ab  Elymaicle  disterminat  omnU  EuUfus." 
The  expres.sion  n_:"^~'an  C3''>,  "  the  province  of 

Elam,"  does  not  by  any  means  convey  the  idea 
of  a  Chaldcean  province  of  that  name,  whose 
capital  was  Susa,  because  the  author  conforms 
entirely  to  the  ancient  Heb.  usage.  Cf.  Nie- 
buhr,  Gejic/i.  Asstirs  und  Babels,  p.  198  et  seq. ; 
Vaihinger,  in  Herzog's  Real-Encykl. ,  Art.  EUim. 
— And  I  -was  by  the  river  of  Ulai,  i.e..  on  the 
banks  of  the  Euteus.  which  flowed  on  one  side 
of  the  city  of  Susa,  while  the  Choaspes  (on 
which  river  the  classics,  as  Herod.,  I.  188;  V. 
49,  53;  Strab.,  XV.  p.  738,  etc.,  locate  that 
town)  probably  bounded  it  on  the  other.  Cor- 
responding with  this,  the  representation  of  a 
large  city,  lying  between  two  rivers,  on  a  bas- 
relief  of  Kuyunjik  copied  by  Layard  (Niiiereh 
and  Babt/loii,  p.  452),  was  probably  designed  for 
Susa.  The  explorations  of  Loftus  in  the  region 
of  Shush  in  1851  make  it  probable  th.it  the 
Eulajus  itself  was  merely  a  fork  or  branch  of 
the  ancient  Choaspes  or  modern  Kerkhah,  and 
that  the  latter  stream  was  also  occasionally 
called  Eulseus  (see  R  idiger,  ZeUschr.  f.  Kunde 
dc.t  Murgenl. ,  XIII.  715  et  seq.  ;  Riietschi,  in 
Herzog's  Real- Encykl. ,  art.  Siisa).  The  peculiar 
name  3^'^'<,  "stream,  water-course,"  which  is 
applied  to  the  Ulai  in  this  place  and  in  vs.  3.  6, 
It),  appears  likewise  to  indicate  that  it  was  not 
so  much  a  single  river  as  a  stream  which  divided 
into  two  forks.  The  same  idea  was  probably 
intended  by  the  expression  "  between  the  Ulai," 
T.  IG  (see  on  that  passage).* 

Verses  3,  4.  The  first  leading  feature  of  the 
vi.iion :  the  Per-iian  ram.  And  behold  there 
stood  before  the  river  a  ram.  "Before  it," 
i.e..  probably,  eastward  from  it,  in  case  the 
branch  of  the  river  which  flowed  to  the  west  of 
Susa  is  intended  ;  for  if  Daniel  did  not  stand  in 
the  castle  of  Shushan,  he  was  at  any  rate  close 
beside  it,  and  therefore  on  the  eastern  bank  of 

*  ["But  why  such  a  locality f  Because  the  jirophet's 
present  vision  begins  with  the  Medo-l'ersian  empire,  and 
Shushan  was  to  be  its  capital.  And  why  on  the  river  k  hunk  f 
Not  because  the  Jews  were  wont  to  hniVX  praifer-htiuiteH  in 
such  places.  Acts  xvi.  \'.i\  nor  because  Ezeldei  had  visions 
on  the  Chaboras.  i.  1,  3  :  iii.  15,  25  a/.  (Leng.) ;  nor  because 
Df  the  solitude  of  the  place  (Maurer) ;  but  simply,  a-s  I  un- 
d';rscand  it,  because  the  castle  ("""iS)  stood  ou  the  banks 

of  the  river.  The  mention  of  the  river,  however,  would  still 
lio  in  a  measure  superfluous,  were  not  this  mention  a  pre- 
paratiou  for  what  is  f«id  in  ver.  16."—  tituart.] 


that  branch  of  the  stream.  If  from  this  position 
he  saw  the  ram  standing  befvre  the  river,  the 
latter  must  likewise  have  been  on  the  eastern 
bank.  ["  Daniel  first  sees  one  ram,  j'^^,  stand- 
ing by  the  river.  The  ins  (one)  does  not  here 
stand  for  the  indefinite  article,  but  is  a  numeral 
in  contradistinction  to  the  two  horns  which  the 
one  ram  has  "  (Keil).  Rather  it  indic.ites  a  soli- 
tary ram,  and  not  a  member  of  a  flock,  as  is 
usual  with  these  gregarious  animals.  For  every 
ram  has  of  course  two  horns.]  The  vision  sym- 
bolizes the  Persian  monarchy  as  a  7'am  (and  after- 
ward the  Grajcian  empire  as  a  he-goat  i,  in  har- 
mony mth  that  mode  of  representation — which 
prevailed  generally  in  the  figurative  language  of 
O.-T.  prophecy  and  accorded  with  Oriental 
modes  of  conception  in  general — by  which 
princes,  national  sovereigns,  or  military  leaders 
were  tyjiified  under  similar  figures  ;  cf .  Isa.  xiv. 
9  ('■  all  the  great  goats  of  the  earth  "),  and  as 
parallel  with  it,  "all  the  kings  of  the  heathen," 
Jer.  1.  8  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  17  ;  Zech.  x.  3.  From 
extra- Biblical  sources,  cf.  Zendar.,  part  II.,  p. 
373  et  seq.,  in  Kleuker  (Ized  Behram  appears 
"like  a  ram  with  clean  feet  and  sharp-poin ted 
horns");  Hamasa,  p.  482,  ed.  Shultens  ;  also 
the  Iliad,  xiii,  491-493;  Cicero,  de  dirinat.,  I. 
23,  14  ;  Plutarch,  Sulla,  c.  27.*  It  is  especially 
significant  that  Persia  is  represented  as  a  male 
sheep,  while  the  Macedonian-Greek  empire  is 
symbolized  as  a  he-goat,  in  view  of  the  contrast 
between  the  solid  prosperity  and  even  abundant 
wealth  of  the  Persian  monarchy,  and  the  com- 
bative, rampant,  and  warlike  nature  of  Mace- 
don.  With  similar  propriety  the  preceding 
vision  (chap.  vii.  5  et  seq.)  employed  the  bear 
to  represent  the  slow,  clumsy,  but  enormous 
power  of  Medo-Persia,  and  the  four-winged  leo- 
pard to  illustrate  the  fleetness  and  warlike  spirit 
of  the  Slacedpnians.  It  is  also  possible  that  an 
indirect  allusion  to  the  ethieal  contrast  between 
Medo-Persia,  as  a  power  which  in  a  religious 
point  of  view  approximated  somewhat  towards 
Shemitism  and  the  Theocracy,  and  maintained 
friendly  relations  with  them,  and  the  Greecian 
empire,  as  being  thoroughly  heathen  and  fun- 
damentally opposed  to  all  monotheism,  was  im- 
plied in  this  representation ;  for  the  parallel 
descriptions  in  chapters  ii.  and  vii.  likewise  de- 
scribe the  succeeding  world-kingdoms  as  in  every 

*  ntad,  1.  c. : 

Oi  oi  aju'  riyffi.6ve^  Tpwtov  eaav  ainap  Irreira 
Aaoi  k-novO  ,  lixrct  re  p.€ra.  (cT(Aou  ((Tttcto  ^ijjAa 
Ilio^ei-  tK  PoTatTjs'  yow^Tai  5"  dpo  Te  (/tptt-a  ttoi^^v. 

Cf.  the  prophetic  dream  relating  to  the  murder  of  a  brothel 
of  Brutus  by  Tarquin  Superbns,  and  to  the  vengeance  in. 
flieted  by  Brutus  for  that  deed,  as  narrated  by  Tarqnin  m 
Cicero,  ile  dicin..  1.  c. 

'*  Vifnm  '(  i"  somntu  pastor  ad  me  adpellere 
Pecits  kntigenim  exiniia  pulchi  itudiue. 
Dun  corisarifttiiitettn  nrietex  itidf  eliui 
Pro'.clarioremtjve  nltennn  immnkne  me  : 
Veinde  tju«  germanum  coriubus  cojinUier 
In  me  arieturt,  euque  ictu  me  ad  cojsuni  dari.^' 

In  Plutarch's  Sr/lla  the  following  is  related,  and  treated  u 
an  omen  of  the  defeat  of  the  j  ounger  Marins  and  the  cousu; 
Xorbanua.  which  oeenrred  stton  afterwards:  eV  Kap-navio 
ntpt  To'Hli^alO^'  (?  read  Ttrftarov  instead)  opos  ijuepa?  uj<|)C7)ffa» 
Svo  Tpdyot  itcyd\ot  (rv/i(/)cpo/jei'oc,  xai  TTavra.  dpuiyrt^  Kai 
jraCTYoeTt?,  (i  avfji^a  I'fi  fjiaxo^A-ivoii  avSpuiWOL^. — Cf.  addi- 
tional e\tracts  from  the  daisies  and  firmi  the  oriental  liter 
at  ire  wliieh  be-ir  on  this  i>o  nt  in  Hfn^riiiek. 


CHAP.  Tin.  1-27. 


173 


case  more  degraded  and  abominable,  in  a  re- 
U^ous  and  ethical  light,  than  their  predecessors 
(see  Eth. -fund,  principles,  etc.,  on  chap.  ii.  No. 
S,  n  and  b).  He-goats  serve  elsewhere  also  as 
symbols  of  a  violent,  savage,  and  obstinately 
hostile  disposition,  while  sheep  (and  consequently 
cams  also)  are  distinguished  by  being  more  gov- 
ernable, and  by  evincing  a  more  peaceful  and 
rnild  nature,  and  thus  are  better  adapted  to  typ- 
ify what  is  ethically  good  and  attractive.  See 
Matt.  XXV.  31-40,  and  cf.  Lange  on  that  passage, 
who  observes  against  Meyer,  and  certainly  with 
justice,  that  in  this  description  of  the  last  judg- 
ment, Christ  does  not  represent  the  wicked 
under  the  symbol  of  goats  because  of  the  in- 
ferior value  of  that  animal  (Luke  xv.  29),  but 
because  of  its  "  incorrigible  obstinacy  "  and  un- 
governable temper  (Vol.  I.  of  the  New-Test,  por- 
tion of  this  Bible  work).  Cf.  also  Piper,  Christui, 
der  Wcltriohter  in  the  evangel.  Kalender,  1853,  p. 
2o.  — Which  had  two  horns ;  and  the  horns 
were  high.  The  ram  was  therefore  not  impo- 
tent and  defenceless,  since  the  tall  horus  which 
he  bore  are  symbols  of  great  power,  being  the 
natural  weapons  of  rams,  both  for  offence  and 
defence  ;  cf.  on  chap.  vii.  7,  24. — But  one  was 
higher  than  the  other,  and  the  higher  came 
up  last.  The  vision  therefore  represents  the 
horns  as  stiU  growing,  and  fixes  the  prophet's 
attention  on  the  fact  that  the  horn  which  comes 
up  last  excels  the  other  in  its  powerful  growth — 
a  striking  illustration  of  the  well-known  process 
of  development  by  which  the  Persian  nation  be- 
came the  head  of  the  Medo-Persian  world-em- 
pire after  the  time  of  Cyrus,  as  being  the  more 
powerful  element  in  the  confederacy,  and  thus 
able  to  compel  the  Median  branch,  though  older, 
to  assume  the  second  place  in  power  and  dignity. 
Theodoret  thinks  that  this  passage  refers  to  the 
expulsion  of  the  dynasty  of  Cyrus  by  the  later, 
but  more  powerful  family  of  Darius  Hystaspis  ; 
the  ram,  however,  does  not  represent  Persia 
only,  but  the  combined  Medo-Persia,  as  the 
angel  expressly  states  in  the  interpretation  v 
20,  and  as  the  parallel  visions  in  chap.  ii.  39  and 
vii.  0.  when  properly  conceived  and  understood, 
compel  us  to  suppose  (see  on  that  pas.sage). — 
Verse  4.  I  saw  the  ram  pushing  westward, 
and  northward,  and  southward.  The  "  push- 
ing "'  can  only  be  intended  to  signify  the  asser- 
tion and  extension  of  its  power  in  a  warlike  man- 
ner; cf.  chap.  xi.  40;  Psa.  xliv.  G  ;  Deut.  xxxiii. 
17;  1  Kings  xxii.  11.  In  this  place  the  pushing 
westward  denotes  more  particularly  the  vic- 
tories of  Medo-Persia  over  Babylonia  and  the 
Lydiau  kingdom  of  Asia  Minor ;  that  toward 
the  north,  the  expeditions  for  the  conquest  of 
Scythia.  led  by  Cyrus  and  Darius  ;  and  that  to- 
wards the  south,  the  conquest  of  Egypt  and 
Libya  by  Cambyses.  The  ram  does  not  push 
eastward,  because  the  east  already  belonged  to 
the  Medo-Persian  empire,  and  no  farther  exten- 
sion in  that  direction  was  to  be  expected.  Hit- 
zig  remarks,  with  incredible  absurdity:  "The 
fourth  quarter  of  the  earth  is  here  unnoticed. 
While  the  ram  turns  bis  head  to  the  right  or  left, 
he  may,  without  changing  his  position,  push 
northward  and  southward,  but  not  backwardx  ; 
in  that  direction,  moreover,  he  would  assail 
Daniel  himself,  and  afterward  Susa  " — as  if  there 
could  have  been  any  difficulty  in  the  matter  of 
changing  the  position  of  the  ram,  in  case  it  be- 


came necessary  to  represent  an  extension  of  its 
power  eastward,  by  the  symbol  of  pushing  in 
that  direction!* — So  that  no  beasts  might 
stand  before  him;  literally,  "and  all  beasts — 
they  stood  not  before  him."  The  imperfect  83 
1~?35^  expresses  here,  as  often,  the  sense  of 
"  not  being  able  to  resist"  (cf.  Gesen.,  Lehrgeb.. 
p.  773  et  seq.).  The  verb  in  this  place  is  mascu- 
line (unlike  v.  22),  because  the  writer  has  in  hia 
mind  the  kingdoms  or  monarchs  symbolized  by 
the  ni'n.  Cf.  the  simUar  enallage  gen.  in  Job 
XV.  6;  Hos.  xiv.  1. — But  he  did  according  to 
his  will  and  became  great.  b^~?'7':,  properly, 
"and  he  made  great,"  namely,  his  power,  i.e.^ 
he  became  strong,  mighty.  Not  "  and  he  pre- 
tended to  be  great,  gave  himself  boastful  airs  " 
(de  Wette,  van  Ess,  Ewald,  etc. ) ;  for,  as  v.  25 
shows,  S"^'^?'7  never  expresses  the  sense  of  boast- 
ing or  conceited  superciliousness  when  standing 
alone,  as  it  does  here  and  in  v.  8,  but  only  when 
joined  with  the  particularizing  T:^»2.f  With 
regard  to  vs.  10  and  11  cf.  infra,  on  those  pas- 
sages. 

Verses  5-7.  The  Oreeciun  hc-goat  and  its  vic- 
tory over  the  Persian  ram.  And  as  I  was  con- 
sidering, behold,  a  he-goat,  etc,  "Consider- 
ing," V^^,  as  in  V.  27.  The  he-goat  with  a 
single  notable  horn  between  the  eyes — hence 
in  its  general  appearance  resembling  one  of  the 
unicoriis  which  are  prominent  in  the  drawings 
on  the  monuments  of  Nineveh,  Babj-lon,  and 
Persepolis — symbolizes  the  Macedonian-Hellen- 
istic world-monarchy  founded  by  Alexander  the 
Great  (whom  the  single  great  horn  more  directly 
represents,  see  v.  21),  and  at  the  same  time  the 
kingdoms  of  the  Diadochi  which  emanated  from 
it,  as  V.  8  indicates  with  all  possible  clearness 
by  the  growth  of  four  new  horns  in  the  place  of 
the  great  horn  which  was  broken.  This  com- 
prehensive animal  symbol  accordingly  includes 
all  that  had  been  characterized  separately  in  the 
two  former  visions  of  the  world-monarchies, 
chapters  ii.  and  vii. ,  at  first  by  the  figure  of  two 
different  parts  of  the  body  of  the  colossu.",  and 
afterward  by  the  symbol  of  two  beasts  appear- 
ing in  succession.  This  departure  from  the 
former  mode  of  representation  involves  no  ques- 
tionable features  whatever,  inasmuch  as  this 
chapter  follows  a  different  train  of  ideas  in  many 
other  respects  as  well,  and  the  advocates  of  the 
interpretation  of  the  fourth  beast  in  chap.  vii. 
(and  of  the  legs  of  clay  and  iron  intermingled, 

*  ["He  did  push  toward  the  east — not  because  ....  tho 
Medo- Persians  themselves  came  from  the  east  (Von  Leng., 
Kran. ) ;  nor  yet  because  the  conquests  of  the  Persians  did 
not  stretch  toward  the  east  (Hav.),  for  Cyrus  and  Darius 
subdued  nations  to  the  east  of  Persia,  even  as  far  as  to  the 
Indus,  but  because,  for  the  unfolding  of  the  iledo- Persian 
monarchy  as  a  world-power,  its  conquasts  in  the  east  were 
subordinate,  and  therefore  are  not  mentioned.  The  pushing 
toward  the  three  world-regions  corresponds  to  the  three  ribs 
of  the  bear,  ch.  vii.  5,  and  intimates  that  the  Medo- 
Persian  world-kingdom,  in  spite  of  the  irresistibility  of  its 
arms,  did  not  extend  its  power  into  all  the  regions  of  tho 
world." — Keil.\ 

t  [Yet  '•  the  idea  of  insolence  or  arrogance  U  not  absent 
from  i^ian  used  thus  absolutely,  see   Sam.  i.  9;  Zeph. 

ii.  S  Flushed  with  success,  we  know  from  all  quarters  that 
the  Persians  assumed  a  haughty  position;  so  Cnesiis  (in 
Herod,  i.  6!)),  IltrpcTai  ....  v^pc(rT(u,  and  so  .^schylui 
{I'era.  7l>5)  ujrepico/iirot  avoi*." — Stmtrt  ] 


174 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


in  chap,  ii.),  which  differs  from  ours,  must  not 
be  permitted  to  urge  their  view  to  the  exclusion 
of  our  own,  because  they  also  are  compelled  to 
acknowledge  that  the  present  vision  combines 
in  one  two  features  which  are  there  found  sepa- 
rately, BO  that  the  one  Medo-Persian  ram  in  this 
place  con'esponds  to  the  two  beasts  in  the  former 
vision,  which,  in  their  judgment,  represent 
Media  and  Persia  (cf.  supra). — Came  from  the 
west  on  the  face  of  the  vrhole  earth,  and 
touched  not  the  ground  j  therefore,  with  great 
swiftness,  as  if  flying,  or  as  if  borne  on  the 
wings  of  the  storm.  Cf.  the  description  of  the 
leopard  in  chap.  vii.  6,  and  the  statement  re- 
specting Alexander  the  Great,  in  1  Mace.  L  3  : 
dif/Aiiei:  iuf  aKpui'  -ijf  yi/c  ;  also  Isa.  xli.  2  et  seq.  ; 
Hos.  xiii.  7  ;  Hab.  i.  6,  8,  and  other  descriptions 
relating  to  conquerors  of  earlier  times, — And 
the  goat  had  a  notable  horn  between  his 
eyes.  TlTn  '\~p_  does  not  signify  a  "'  horn  of 
vision "  (Hofmann,  Weiss,  viul  ErfuUung.  I, 
292),  but  rather  a  "  notable  horn,"  as  the  parallel 
nbna  in  vs.  8  and  21  shows,  and  as  the  ancient 
versions  already  declare  (Theod.  :  nepai;  ^eupTrrdv ; 
Vulg.  :  cornu  insigne,  etc.) ;  cf.  "^'I'a  ■i"^t<,  2 
•Sam.  xxiii.  21;  also  Targ.,  Esth.  ii.  2;  Gen. 
vii  11. — Verse  G.  And  he  came  to  the  ram  that 
had  two  horns.  The  Ai'abs  term  Alexander  the 
Great  "  the  two-horned  one,"  because  he  was 
represented  on  coins,  etc. ,  as  the  son  of  Jupiter 
Ammou,  wearing  two  horns  on  his  head.  The 
fact  that,  on  the  contrary,  the  Medo-Persian 
empire  which  he  conquered  is  represented  as  a 
double-horned  ram,  indicates  with  sufficient 
clearness  that  the  symbolic  visions  of  this  chap- 
ter did  not  originate  with  a  pseudo-Daniel,  who 
prophesied  subsequent  to  the  event.  Cf.  Kran- 
ichfeld  on  this  passage,  where  he  justly  rejects 
Hitzig's  opinion  that  we  have  here  merely  an  ' '  ac- 
cidental analogy  "  to  the  Arabian  idea. — And  ran 
unto  him  in  the  fury  of  his  pow^er ;  properly, 
in  the  heat  of  his  power,  i.e. ,  iu  the  irresistible 
rage  (nan)  of  which  he  was  capable  by  reason 
of  his  mighty  power.  Hiivemick  is  not  exactly 
correct  when  he  reads  ' '  full  of  a  fierce  desire  for 
battle  ;  "  nor  are  De  Wette,  Von  Lengerke,  etc.,  in 
their  version,  "  iu  his  mighty  rage." — Verse  7. 
And  I  saw  him  come  close  unto  the  ram.  The 
manner  in  which  Alexander  the  Great,  at  the 
head  of  the  Macedonian  forces,  put  an  end  to 
the  Medji-Persian  empire,  corresponds  in  the 
main  with  this  description  of  the  assault  by  the 
goat  upon  the  ram,  which  resulted  in  the  break- 
ing of  the  two  horns  of  the  latter  ( i.e. ,  the  power 
of  Media  and  of  Persia),  but  still  not  so  exactly 
as  to  suggest  a  sketching  ex  event  ii  of  that  event. 
The  figurative  description  is  especially  defective 
in  not  containing  any  tolerably  clear  indication 
of  the  fact  that  several  vigorous  blows  by  the 
ram,  which  were  inflicted  at  different  points  (the 
first  at  Granicns,  the  next  at  Issus,  and  the  final 
one  in  the  neighborhood  of  Susa  and  the  Eulijeus 
river),  were  required  to  break  and  destroy  the 
Persian  power.  A  Maccabajan  pseudo-Daniel 
would  hardly  have  escaped  the  temptation  to 
introduce  more  tangible  allusions  to  these  fea- 
tures. 

Verses  8-12.  The  little  horn  which  gyeai  from 
the  goat,  and  its  opjlence  against  the  Most  High 
uiid  His  sanctuary.  And  the  goat  waxed  very 


great.  Here  again  b"^~3n  does  not  signify  "  to 
pretend  to  greatness,"  but  "  to  become  great,  ta 
develop  mightily."  *  "Stl  T>,  "'  unto  excess," 
as  in  Gen.  xxvii.  33 ;  1  Kings  i.  4;  Isa.  Ixiv.  8. 
— And  vrhen  he  w^as  (or,  "had  become') 
strong,  the  great  horn  was  broken.  T3253i 
when  the  height  of  his  "becoming  great"  was 
reached,  when  his  power  was  at  its  climax. 
Thiidi  of  Alexander's  expeditions  to  Bactria, 
Sogdiana,  and  India,  which  were  soon  followed 
by  his  death.  The  " '  breaking  of  the  great  horn," 
however,  does  not  refer  simply  to  Alexander's 
death,  but  also  to  the  division  of  the  dominion 
and  disruption  of  the  unity  of  the  realm  imme- 
diately consequent  on  the  decease  of  that  mon- 
arch.— And  for  it  came  up  four  notable  ones. 
MTn  is  properly  in  apposition  with  >"?"'<,  "  con- 
spicuousness.  four,"  or  also  an  adverbial  accusa- 
tive, "  in  conspicuousness,  in  a  notable  manner ;  " 
cf.  supra,  on  v.  5.  Each  of  the  separate  powers 
is  therefore  still  important,  although  each  re- 
ceives but  a  fourth  of  the  power  and  greatness 
of  the  original  collective  empire. — Toward  the 
four  VTinds  of  heaven.  This  addition  alludes 
to  the  centrifugal  principle,  tending  to  division 
and  separation,  which  after  Alexander's  death 
(not  after  the  battle  of  Ipsus,  as  Hitzig  prefers) 
seized  on  the  Macedonian-Hellenistic  world- 
monarchy,  in  which  the  centralizing  principle 
had  hitherto  prevailed.  The  number  of  the 
horns  appears  to  be  based  on  the  number  of  the 
winds,  and  to  be  a  standing  symbolic  expression 
which  is  found  in  other  writers  also  (cf.  Jer. 
xlix,  36;  Zech.  ii.  10;  vi.  5;  Job  i.  19).  It  is 
at  any  rate  of  symbolic  significance,  referring  to 
the  separation  and  parting  of  the  empire  toward 
all  quarters  of  the  world ;  and  it  is  therefore  not 
admissible  to  seek  four  particular  kingdoms 
which  should  be  denoted  by  the  four  horns 
growing  towards  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth, 
as  those  of  Cassander  (Macedon).  Lysimachua 
(Thrace  and  Asia  Minor),  Seleucus  (Syria,  Baby- 
lonia, and  Persia),  and  Ptolemy  (Egypt). f  Both 
the  opponents  and  the  advocates  of  the  genuine- 
ness of  this  book,  since  Porphyry  and  Jerome, 
are  agreed  in  this  speciaUzing  interpretation  of 
the  four  homs,  by  which  the  kingdoms  of  the 
four  Diadochi,  who  have  been  mentioned,  are  ob- 
tained (cf.  in  addition  Havemick.  Hitzig,  Ewald. 
and  Kamphausen,  on  the  passage).  But  they  do 
not  consider  (1)  that  not  the  battle  of  Ip.'ius,  but 
the  death  of  Alexander,  the  monarch  who 
founded  the  empire,  is  given  as  the  terminiii  a 
5 «o  at  which  the  growth  of  the  "four  homs" 
begins  ;  (2)  that  in  point  of  fact  the  number  of 
the  great  empires'  of  the  Diadochi  Cassander, 
Lysimachus,  etc.,  was  limited  to  four  during  a 
period  even  more  brief  than  that  during  which 
the  empire  was  a  imit  under  .Alexander;  (3) 
that  the  enumeration  of  four  such  empires  even 
immediately  subsequent  to  the  battle  of  Ipsus 

*  [The  necessity  for  this  limitation  of  the  meaning  of 
i^'nnn  here  is  not  clear  ;  it  seems  better  to  take  it  in  the 

same  sense  of  arrogance  as  the  result  of  succeas  which  it 
bears  in  the  remainder  of  the  chapter,] 

t  [Yet  Daniel  says  explicitly  that  the  four  horns  are  foul 
kingdomn  (ver.  22 )i  and  the  coincidence  is  too  striking  and 
minute  to  be  accidental.  There  weie  indeed  originally  Ave 
of  the  Diadochi,  but  they  so  soon  resolved  themselves  int< 
four  that  this  temporary  pentarchy  is  disregarded.] 


CHAP.  VIII.  1-27. 


175 


might  be  assailed  as  being  inexact,  inasmuch  as 
Demetrias,  the  son   of  Antigonus  whom  those 
kings  had  conquered,  stood  upon  the  scene  of 
action  (as  ruler  of  the  sea,  and  lord  of  Phoenicia, 
Cyprus,  Athens,  etc. ),  as  well  as  the  independent 
rulers  of  the  Achsemenidaa  who  governed  Pontus, 
Armenia,  and  Cappadocia ;   (4)  that  the  parallel 
visions  in  chap.  ii.  and  vii.  appear  to  indicate  a 
division  of  the  original  empire  into  two  kingdoms 
(the  "two  legs"  of  the  colossus,  chap.  ii.  33, 
40  et  seq.),  or  into  ten  (cf.  Bleek's  interpretation 
of  the  ten  horns,  chap.  vii.  7)  instead  of  four. 
Among  modem  expositors  Kranichfeld  advocates 
the  correct  view  by  laying  the  principal  stress  on 
the  symbolic  idea  of  a  "dispersion  to  the  four 
winds,"  and  contenting  himself  with  observing 
in  relation  to  the  bearing  of  this  prophecy  upon 
the  four  empires  of  the  Diadochi  in  question, 
that   "  the  prophetic   idea   is   verified  formally 
also,  by  events  suggesting  its  fulfilment  which 
were  connected  with  the  four  kingdoms  of  the 
Diadochi  in  the  Macedonian  realm." — Verse  9. 
And  out  of  one  of  them  came  forth  a  little 
horn.     rriiSK'p,  literally,  "out  of  httlenesa,  in 
a  small  way,"  an  adverbial  conception  of  similar 
formation  as  Ct'p  Tp,  Ii"'2'^  yi^  in  chap.  ii.  8, 
47  (see  on  those  passages).     On  the  masculine 
forms  Q~5  and  S<^;|)  cf.    the   similar  construc- 
tions ad    seiisum  in    v.   4  (11'9?")  and  v.   11 
(b^ia").  —  The    horn    from    which    the    horn 
"  sprouting   in    a    diminutive   manner "    comes 
forth  has  its  historical  counterpart  in  the  king- 
dom of  the  Seleueidae ;   the  little  horn  which 
sprouts  or  branches  forth   from   it — after   the 
manner  of  the  prongs  in  the  antlers  of  a  deer — 
finds,  like  that  in  chap.  vii.  8,  its  most  pregnant 
historical  illustration  in  the  most  godless  off- 
spring of  that  dynasty,  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
The  little  horn,  however,  was  certainly  not  in- 
tended to  represent  EJJiphanes  only  and  exclu- 
sively,  as  the  description  shows  that  immedi- 
ately follows,  which  relates  to  the  predecessors 
of  Epiphanes  also,  especially  to  Antiochus  the 
Great,  and  perhaps  even  suggests  a  reference  to 
Seleucus  Nicator  and  his  expeditions  to  Persia 
and    India    in    search    of    conquest. —  Which 
waxed  exceeding  great  toward  the  .south  and 
toward  the  east.     It  is  usual  to  apply  this  to 
the  wars  of   Ant.   Epiphanes  against  Egypt   (1 
Mace.   i.    18  et  seq.  ;  cf.   infra,   Dan.   xi.  22  et 
seq.),    against   the   countries    beyond   the   Eu- 
phrates,  Armenia  and  Elymais  (1   Mace.  i.  31, 
37;  vi.  1  et  seq.  ;  cf.  Appian.,  Si/r.^  c.  45,  66), 
and  against  the  Jews  under  the  leadership  of 
the  Asmonaeans.     But   Syria  derived  no   "ex- 
ceeding greatness  under  that  tyrant  from  these 
wars;  the  "'^V^'^??^!  may  be  far  more  appro- 
priately applied  to  the  former  extensions  of  the 
power  of  the  Seleucidse  under  Sel.  Nicator  and 
Antiochus  the  Great  (whose  conquests  toward 
the  west  are  not  noticed,  probably  because  of 
their  transient  character).     Moreover,  in   case 
the  reference  to  the  undertakings  of  Epiphanes 
that  have  been  mentioned  could  be  established, 
the  prophecy  would  be  so  direct  in  its  applica- 
tion, that  it  would  be  hardly  possible  to  defend 


its  origin  during  the  captivity  with  Daniel.  *  It 
is  better,  therefore,  to  be  content  with  the  more 
general,  and,  so  to  speak,  collective  or  genealo- 
gical interpretation  of  the  "little  horn,"  by 
which  it  signifies,  m<w«  immediately,  the  anti- 
theocratic  or  anti-Christian  governing  power  in 
the  empire  of  the  Seleueidae  merely,  the  power 
of  the  "transgressors,"  who  are  clearly  distin- 
guished in  like  manner  in  v.  23  from  Ant.  Epi- 
phanes as  the  most  concentrated  expression  of 
the  anti-theistic  principle  (see  on  that  passage). 
Cf.  also  Kranichfeld,  who,  while  assenting  to 
this  general  idea  of  the  little  horn,  seeks  to  ex- 
plain the  circumstance  that  the  growth  of  this 
horn  toward  the  west  is  not  mentioned,  by  as- 
suming that  ' '  the  Grecian  horn  as  such  is  con- 
ceived as  being  in  the  icest  and  as  operating  from 
thence,"  and  that  therefore  the  author  "would 
naturally  describe  it  as  asserting  its  power  only 
in  the  regions  which  lay  southward  and  eastward 
from  Javan." — And  toward  the  pleasant  land, 
■^j^rn,  properly,  "  the  ornament;"  here  equiva- 
lent to  ^32Zn  7-H  (chap.  xi.  16,  41),  i.e.,  the 
valued,  precious  lacd,  the  blessed  land,  the  land 
of  Israel ;  cf.  Jer.  iii^  19 ;  Ezek.  xx.  6,  15  ; 
Zech.  viL  14;  Psa.  cvi.  24.  "Palestine  is  here 
noticed  as  a  third  land  between  the  south  and 
the  east,  as,  in  a  different  connection,  in  Isa. 
xix.  23  et  seq.,  it  is  located  between  the  once 
hcstUe  Egypt  and  Assyria."! — Verse  10.  And 
it  waxed  great,  even  to  the  host  of  heaven. 
The  "  becomiug  great"  is  here  no  longer  to  be 
taken  in  the  strict  and  proper  objective  sense, 
but  is  subjective,  an  impious  presumption,  a 
conceited  pride  whose  greatness  reached  to  the 
host  of  heaven ;  cf.  v.  25.  The  "host  of 
heaven,"  however,  is  doubtless  a  figurative  ex- 
pression, referring  in  strong  eulogistic  phrase  to 
Israel,  the  community  of  saints,  who  contsi- 
tute  "the  Lord's  host"  on  earth,  even  as  the 
glittering  stars  form  His  host  in  the  sky ;  of. 
Gen.  XV.  5;  xxii.  17;  Num.  xxiv.  17;  also  Ex. 
vii.  4 ;  xii.  41  ;  and  further,  the  name  Jehovah 
Sabaoth,  which  probably  designates  God  in  a 
two-fold  sense,  namely,  as  the  "  Lord  of  hosts," 
%vith  reference  to  the  starry  host,  and  also  to 
people  of  Israel,  the  host  of  His  earthly  servants 
and  elect  ones.  The  figurative  designation  of 
Israel  £is  the  "host  of  heaven"  was  probably 
caused  by  the  designed  assonance  between  S*^^ 
and  "'^^.  the  latter  of  which  had  just  been  em- 
ployed to  characterize  the  tend  of  Israel.  J — And 
it  cast  down  (some)  of  the  host  and  of  the 
stars  to  the  ground.     The  copula  before  IP 


*  [The  force  of  theac  »rguraentfi.  especially  the  last,  for 
extendingtlie  import  of  '*  the  little  horn  '"  beyond  Antiochua 
Epiphanes.  it  is  very  difficult  for  those  who  are  wholly  ua- 
tinged  with  rationalistic  sentimentfi  to  appreciate.] 

t  A  later  Rabbinical  interpretation  conceives  "^322  in  the 

sense  of  *'  gazelle,'"  and  refers  this  designation  partly  to  it* 
Ijeauty,  and  partly  to  its  peculiarity  to  extend  its  border.^ 
when  inhabited,  like  the  skin  of  a  gazelle,  but  to  shrink 
when  uninhabited  {Taanith,  ti9  a). 

X  ["The  comparison  of  the  saints  to  the  host  of  heaven 
has  its  root  in  this,  that  God.  the  king  of  Israel,  is  called 
the  God  of  hosts,  and  by  the   n"lfit32fc  {I'Osttt)  are  generally 

to  be  understood  the  stars  or  angels ;  but  the  tribes  of  Israel 
also,  who  were  led  by  God  out  of  Egypt,  are  called  'tiw 
hosts  of  Jehovah '  (Eiod.  vii.  4 ;  lii.  41)."— ife'fc] 


176 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


C^saiSn  is  explicative  (=  namely),  aad  serves 
to  introduce  an  explanatory  clause,  intended  to 
sustain  the  force  of  the  fifrure  presented  in  the 
preceding   sentence  while    applying    the   term 
s;:r — which  is  not   metaphorical   in   itself — to 
the  host  of  Israel,  and  thus  to  strengthen  the 
conception   of    the    impious   character   of    the 
attempt. — And  stamped   upon  them,  namely, 
the  members  of  the  people  of  God ;  cf.   v.   13 
and  chap.    vii.   21,  25.     The  manner  in  which 
this  part  of  the  prophetic  vision  was  fulfilled 
uuder  Ant.  Epiphanes  is  recorded  in  1  Mace.  i. 
24,  30,  37  ;  ii.  38.     Cf.  the  reference  expressly 
to  this  prophecy  in  2  Mace.  ix.  10. — Verse  11. 
Tea,  he  magnified  himself  even  to  the  prince 
of  the  host.      The  masculine   i"''??'"'   is  used 
because  the  foe  who  is  typified  by  the  horn  is 
intended  ;  cf.  xi.  36. — The  "  princeof  the  host" 
is  of  course  not  identical  with  him  who  is  men- 
tioned in  Josh.  V.  14  (who  is  probably  identical 
with  Michael,   Dan.  x.   13),  but  the  Most  High 
God   Himself,   to    whom  v.    25  refers  as  the 
"Prince  of  princes."     Cf.  chap.  vii.  8,  20,  25  ; 
xi.  36. — And  by  him  the  daily  sacrifice  was 
taken  away.     The  ene»iy  of  God's  people,  who 
is  symbolized  by  the  horn,  must  be  regarded  as 
the  agent  of  the  two  passive  verbs  Clin  and 
TjVan  (for  which  Hitzig,  following  the  Keri  and 
the  versions,  unnecessarily  desires  to  substitute 
the  actives  3^1"  and  '^b'iini).     l^'pPn,   "  the 
daily"  (Gr.  hSEy^x"'M°i)-,  designates,  as  is  shown 
by  the  mention  of  "the  place  of  his  sanctuary" 
immediately  afterward,  the  daily  service  in  the 
temple,    and   more    particularly,    probably   the 
daily  nwrning  and  evening  sacrifices,  the  nil? 
"I^"r,  Num.    xxviii.  3;    1   Chron.  xvi.  40;    3 
Chron.  xxix.  7.     Cf.  the  rabbinical  usage  which 
expresses  this  idea  also  by  T-?;rn  simply ;  cf. 
also  infra,  on  v.  14. — The  events  in  the  history 
of  the  theocracy  immediately  prior  to  the  Chris- 
tian ajra,  which  fulfilled  this  prophecy  in  a  mea- 
sure, are  narrated  in  1  Mace.  i.  39,  45  et  seq.  ; 
iii.  45. — Verse  12.  And  a  host  was  given  him 
against  the  daily  sacrifice  by  reason  of  trans- 
gression;  rather,   "and  war  in   raised  against 
the  daily  sacrifice,  with  outrage."     The  impert. 
verbs  iriP  and  '^ir?  are  not,  indeed,  praster- 
ites  (Hitzig),  but  they  are  not  used  in  a  strictly 
future  sense  (Ewald,  Lehrb.,  p    829   et  seq.). 
They  denote,  rather,  the  idea  that  the  predicted 
course   of    conduct    accords   with    the   Divine 
decree,  or  that  it  is  ordained  or  permitted  by 
Sod,  thus  corresponding  to  chap.  vii.  14,  17,  or 
Bupra,   V.   4.     This   sense   is   most   readily  ex- 
pressed in  the  English  by  the  present  tense. — 
ir:p  S2^  does  not  signify  "the  host  is  given 
ip.  or  devoted  to  ruin"  (De  Wette,  Von  Len- 
ferke,  Hiivemick,  Kranichfeld,   etc.),   but,   "a 
nar  is  carried  on,  a  warlike  expedition  is  begun, 
»   campaign  is   undertaken "    (cf.    Isa.    xl.    2). 
The   correct  view  was  already  entertained  by 
Jerome,   Luther,   etc.,   and  among  modems  by 
Hitzig,  Kamphausen,  and  Ewald,  the  latter  of 
whom  justly  notices  the  contrast  between  VS2 
liere  and  the  same  word  in  v.  10.  where  it  stands 
iu  a  different  sense,  and  therefore  translates, 


"  and  the  compulsion  of  a  host  is  imposed  on  th« 
daily."  His  idea  is  that  compuhion  is  employed 
for  the  purpose  of  introducing  idolatrous  wor- 
ship in  place  of  the  ser\  ice  of  the  tn;3  God.  and 
particularly,  compulsion  to  service  in  the  host, 
so  that  ' '  host  stands  opposed  to  host,  serfdom 
to  the  true  service  (of  Godi,  coercion  to  free- 
dom."— In  imitation  of  Theodotion  (rai  ii^<iti 
i-i  Ti/v  ^vaiav  afiapna),  Bertholdt  makes  the  very 
uncalled-for  proposition  of  rejecting  S^^^l  from 
the  text,  and  then  reading  "l?Bn.  5'4:ca  un- 
questionably indicates  the  method  of  making 
war  upon  the  daily  sacrifice  ;  it  stands  sensu  ob- 
jectiro,  to  designate  the  outrageous  heathen 
idolatry  or  sacrificial  service,  which  superseded 
the  worship  belonging  to  the  true  faith.  The 
same  feature  occurs  iu  v.  13,  where  '■^^  is 
added,  to  strengthen  the  idea.* — And  it  cast 
("oasts ")  dowTi  the  truth  to  the  ground.  The 
subject  of  '^l?™r'^  (for  which  Hitzig,  following 
the  Septuagint,  Theodot.,  and  Syr.,  prefers  to 
read  "iji't-nn)  is  the  TliJ,  which  is  last  mentioned 

•  [Keil  thus  reviews  the  various  interpretations  proposed 
of  this  difficult  clause  :  •'  "We  must  altogether  reject  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  Vulgate.  '/.'oAitr  autem  datum  eat  con- 
tra Juge  nacrijicium  propter  peceata,^  which  is  reproduced 
in  Luther's  translation.  '  There  was  given  to  him  such 
strength  against  the  daily  siicritice  on  account  of  sin  ; '  or 
Calvin's,  *  Et  tempus  datum  est  super  jugi  mcrifivio  in 
gcelere,^  whereby,  after  Rashi's  example,  idS  is  Interpreted 
of  the  statio  viilUaris.  and  thence  the  interpretation  tempus 
or  intervatlum  is  derived.  For  &<;:];  means  neither  roixttr 
nor  teynptts^  nor  statio  militaris,  but  only  miluari/  tervice, 
and  perhaps  military  forces.    Add  to  this  that  &(a^  both 

in  vers.  10  and  1.3  means  host.  If  we  maintain  this,  with 
the  majority  of  interpreters,  only  two  explanations  are  ad- 
missible, according  as  we  understand  5tLi  of  the  host  of 

heaven,  i.e.,  of  Israel,  or  of  some  other  host.  The  latter  in- 
terpretation Ls  apparently  supported  partly  by  the  abseuce. 
of   the    article    in  5tZ2fc  aud    partly  by    the  construction 

of  the  word  as   fem.  ("^Tl.r]^    Accordingly,    Hitzig  saya 

that  a  Hebrew  reader  could  not  understand  the  words  othw- 
wise  than  as  meaning,  *aud  a  warlike  expedition  \va.s  niaoi6 
or  conducted  against  the  daily  sacrifice  with  wickednest ' 
(i.e.,  the  impure  service  of  idols) :  while  others  translate, 
*  and  a  host  placed  against  the  daily  sacrifice  on  account  ol 
sin'  (Syr.,  Grot.,  Harenb,,  J.  D.  Michaelis) :  or,  'a  host  ia 
given  against  the  daily  sacrifice  in  w*ickedness'  (Wie-eler) ; 
or,  '  given  against  that  which  was  continual  with  the  service 
of  idols'  •  e.,  so  that,  in  the  place  of  the  '  continual '  wick- 
ednes.s.  the  worship  of  idols  is  appointed  (Hofmnnn) ;  or, 
'  the  power  of  an  army  is  given  to  it  (the  horn^  against  the 
daily  sacrifice  througlt  wickedness,'  i.e.,  by  the  evil  higher 
dfemons  (Ebrard).  But  the  latter  interpretation  is  to  be 
rejected  on  account  of  the  arbitrary  insertion  of  "IJ  {to 
it);  and  against  all  the  others  it  is  \x^  be  remarked  that  there 
is  no  proof  either  from  ver.  13,  or  f"om  Ezek.  .vxxii.  23,  or 
xxvi.  S,  that  "1^2  means  to  lead  out,  to  bring  for\vard.  to 
give  contrary  to  or  against."  Keil  concludes  by  translating  ; 
"And  (a)  host  shaU  be  given  up  toe-ether  with  the  daily 
sacrifice,  because  of  transgression."  St'iart  renders.  '•  And 
«  host  was  placed  over  the  daily  sacrifict  by  wickednes.s** 
and  remarks ;  "  P-at  or  place  is  a  very  cotui:»on  meaning  of 
"ITir,  as  also  the  kindred  signification  to  appoiiU,  constitute . 

see  Lex. — ^3?,  orer,  in  a  hostile  sense,  implying  that  the 
daily  sacrifice  was  subjected  to  oppression  and  impiona 
supervision.— 2?*,:;2S,  by  the  rebel.    Hence,  in  the  N.  Test., 

2Thes8.  ii.  3,  awwrToaia  (an  exact  version  of  JTD5),  alu)  j 

avdfmnot  Trjs  afiapTiai  ;  and  in  v.  S  (ib. ),  6  avofio^  ;  expres- 
sions having  their  basis,  as  I  apprehend,  in  the  vcrec  befon. 
U8,  and  applied  by  Paul  to  some  personage  of  a  chnvactw 
similar  to  that  of  Antioch"?."] 


CHAP.  VIII.  1-27. 


177 


in  V.  10,  and  which  forms  the  principal  feature 
of  the  entire  description  before  us.  The  "truth  " 
(r?3»,  Theodot. ,  diKamniv/,)  to  be  cast  down  by 
this  "horn"  is  the  true  relig-ion,  the  objective 
truth  of  God,  which  is  revealed  in  the  law  and 
the  prophets  (cf.  Psa.  xix.  10;  xxx.  10;  also 
Dan.  ix.  13).  V.  14  shows  that  its  being  cast 
down,  like  that  of  the  daily  sacrifice,  shaU  con- 
tinue but  for  a  brief  period. — And  it  practised 
and  prospered;  rather,  "and  it  accomplishes 
this,  and  prospers,"  namely,  because  of  the 
Divine  permission.  The  words,  and  indeed  the 
verse  as  a  whole,  serve  to  recapitulate  and 
gather  together  the  preceding  statements. 

Verses  13,  14.  A  question  conceniing  the 
duration  of  the  oppression  of  the  truth,  and  the 
answer  to  this  question.  Then  I  heard  one 
saint  speaking.  This  speaking  angel  (for  -ili" 
here  signifies  an  angel,  cf.  ly^.P.,  chap.  iv.  10, 
and  also  Dent,  xxxiii.  2 ;  Job  v.  1  ;  xv.  5  ;  Psa. 
Ixxxix,  a,  8;  Zech.  xiv.  1)  enters  into  the  vision 
here  described  without  previous  notice,  because 
the  prophet  conceives  of  the  whole  scene  as  sur- 
rounded by  angels,  similar  to  chap.  vii.  10  ;  cf. 
V.  16,  and  analogous  features  (perhaps  in  imita- 
tion of  thLs  passage)  in  the  night  visions  of 
Zecbariah,  e.g.,  Zech.  i.  9  et  seq.,  13  et  seq.  ; 
ii.  2,  5,  7 ;  iii.  1  et  seq.  ;  iv.  1  et  seq.  The  pro- 
phet does  not  state  what  the  angel,  who  is  intro- 
duced in  this  mysterious  and  dreamlike  man- 
ner, said  at  first,  evidently  because  he  does  not 
know,  i.e..  because,  although  he  has  heard  him 
speak,  he  has  not  understood  his  words.  He 
saw.  therefore,  two  angels,  who  were  engaged 
in  conversing  with  each  other,  and  lieard  one 
of  them  say  something  which  he  failed  to  under- 
stand ;  the  question,  however,  which  the  other 
addressed  to  the  first  speaker  was  so  clearly 
apprehended  by  the  prophet  that  he  was  able 
to  repeat  it  in  the  latter  half  of  this  verse. 
Ewald  puts  it,  correctly  :  "  Thus,  at  the  first 
moment  of  sOence  after  that  speech,  he  sud- 
denly hears  one  angel  ask  another,  imih  whom  he 
is  conversing,'"  etc.  Hitzig,  Kamphausen,  etc. , 
on  the  other  hand,  are  arbitrary  :  "The  second 
angel  addressed  the  speaker,  by  directing  an  in- 
quiry in  the  interest  of  Daniel  to  him  (v.  13  b), 
bi/  rep/i/ing  to  which  the  other  angel  became  for 
the  first  time  a  speakers!'  According  to  this  the 
greater  part  of  v.  13  would  be  a  logical  paren- 
thesis, and  the  words  "and  he  said  unto  me  "  at 
the  beginning  of  v.  14  would  serve  simply  to  re- 
sume the  introductory  words  of  v.  13  ;  the  lan- 
guage of  the  writer,  however,  does  not  accord 
with  this  view.  His  evident  aim  is  to  repeat 
what  he  has  overheard  of  a  conversation  be- 
tween two  angels  ;  otherwise  the  most  simple 
course  for  him  would  have  been  to  address  the 
inquiry  concerning  the  duration  of  the  tribuliv- 
tion  to  the  angel  in  person,  as  in  chap.  vii.  10, 
which  is,  in  other  respects,  an  analogous  case. 
— How  long  shall  be  the  vision  concetning  the 
dziily  saorifice.  "  The  vision,"  i.e.,  the  subject 
of  the  viision,  which  is  here  more  specially  indi- 
cated by  the  two  genitives  that  follow,  viz.  : 
n^':?!"  and  -r"^  ''"■PPl'"'.-  The  anxious  ques- 
tion as  to  "how  long?"  (cf.  Lsa.  vi.  11)  is 
caused  by  the  fearful  and  alarming  character  of 
the  profanation  and  destruction,  as  seen  in  the 
vision  of  the  prophet.— And  the  transgression 


of  desolation;  rather,  "  and  the  horrible  trans- 
•  grcssion."  ^"-,  the  partic.  of  Cl^r,  "to  be 
astonished,"  and  then  "to  be  desolate  or  laid 
waste,"  certainly  expresses  the  idea  of  the 
"horrible  or  monstrous"  (Lat.  horrendus), 
whether  the  intransitive  sense  of  "being  as- 
tounded," or,  in  accord  with  Ezek,  xxxvi.  3,  the 
less  general  transitive  sense  of  "  laying  waste," 
be  regarded  as  the  radical  meaning ;  cf.  on 
chap.  ix.  27.  In  the  laUer  case  it  would  pro- 
bably be  necessary  to  tiSnslate  the  participle  as  a 
substantive  in  apposition;  "and  (of)  the  trans- 
gressor, the  destroyer  ;  "  *  but  in  the  former 
case  also,  where  the  adjective  sense  "  hon'ible  " 
(Ewald)  or  "astounding"  (Kranichfeld)  is 
chosen,  the  participle  must  be  regarded  as  a 
kind  of  appositional  supplement  to  '"4-"2,  to 
which  it  is  therefore  added  without  the  article 
(as  in  Ezek.  xxxix.  27).  The  expression  Srsn 
C~3,  instead  of  which  D^Sn  3>rtS  might  have 
been  expected  (cf.  xi.  31),  produces  a  sol- 
emu  emphasis,  which  warrants  the  urgent  ques- 
tion that  is  proposed. — To  give  both  the  sanc- 
tuary (rather,  "the  most  sacred  thing")  and 
the  host  to  be  trodden  under  foot,  i.e., 
to  give  both  the  holy  sacrifice  (the  central 
point  of  worship)  and  the  community  of  the 
samts  of  the  Most  High  (cf.  vii.  18,  23,  27).  the 
partakers  of  the  theocratic  covenant,  to  be  trod- 
den under  foot  (thus  Ewald,  correctly).  [The 
grammatical  construction  of  the  latter  clause  of 
the  verse  seems  to  be  that  nri  and  liJlp  and 
!<~^  are  all  in  dependence  upon  Ti'n^  like  l^SFl 
and  "™S  preceding.  "  How  long  shall  be  .  .  . 
.  (the)  giving,  and  (the)  sanctuary,  and  (the) 
host  (to  be)  trampled."  3?1'?  thus  qualifies 
all  the  last  three  nouns,  the  latter  two  directly 
as  an  adj.,  and  the  former  as  an  equivalent  for 
the  infin.]  "  The  expression  adds  nothing  that 
is  new  to  the  former  statements,  but  simply  re- 
peats the  comprehensive  estimate  of  the  condi- 
tion of  the  Jewish  religion  referred  to,  and  the 
outrage  committed  against  it,  in  the  light  of  the 
idea  that  they  are  permitted  by  a  superior  Pro- 
vidence ;  and,  in  point  of  fact,  the  only  object 
of  the  question  is  to  recapitulate  what  has 
already  been  said.  The  asyndetic  connection 
accords  with  the  abrupt  conciseness  of  the  de- 
scription, and  the  disjunctive  "]  before -Ip  and 
H32,  added  to  the  lack  of  conjunctions,  is  suit- 
ed to  its  poetic  character  (note  also  the  omission 
of  articles).  Consequently,  everything  that  Hit- 
zig regards  as  objectionable  in  this  place,  and 
that  he  urges  against  the  traditional  pointing 
for  the  purpose  of  removing  "P  to  the  preced- 
ing clause,  arises  naturally  from  the  subject  it- 
self. Moreover,  the  explanation  of  "p;  by  Hit- 
zig, '  to  permit  the  horrible  transgression  to  go 
on,'  has  no  parallel,  neither  in  v.  12,  nor  in  lsa. 


•  [Stuart,  on  the  other  band,  strongly  contends  for  the 
pasw'pe  sense  of  S^O'tT  here,    '^equivalent  to  which  oughl 

to  he  laid  wa^le  or  dett'-oj/ed,"  as  being  sustained  not  only 
by  the  intransitive  force  of  the  root,  but  bv  the  distinctivt 
use  of  the  transitive  D?2ID?3  in  cli.  ix.  27.  KeiJ  :.<ike8  3i.'\> 
Btaatially  the  same  view.] 


ITS 


THE  PROPHET  DA>"IEL. 


X.  6,  where,  like  the  synonymous  litlv  '  to  make 
into' something,'  it  is  joined  to  a  double  accusa- 
tive ;  and  when  Hitzig  takes  ^~'■  at  first  in  the 
sense  of  '  to  permit,'  and  immediately  afterward 
makes  it  signify  ■  to  make  into  something,'  the 
artificial  zeugma  certainly  does  not  diminish  the 
imaginary  difficulty  which,  in  view  of  the  disjunc- 
tive vav,  he  discovers  in  the  vav  that  is  not  pre- 
fixed to  ^^,"  (Kranichfeld.)— Verse  14.  And  he 
said  unto  me.  Thus  all  the  MSS. ,  which  read 
"is,  while  the  ancient  translators,  and  among 
modem  expositors,  Bertholdt.  Dereser,  Hitzig, 
Ewald,  etc. ,  prefer  T'is.  The  latter  form  certain- 
ly seems  to  accord  better  with  the  contents  of  v. 
13,  since  it  is  supposed  that  the  "i^l^n  ^'.yzbs  (cf. 
Ruth  iv.  1)  who  says  what  follows,  would  address 
it  to  the  other  angel,  who  inquires  of  him  :  but  it 
is  conceivable,  on  both  logical  and  psychological 

■  grounds,  that  the  witness  to  the  conversation  of 
the  angels  would  represent  the  information  con- 
veyed in  the  reply  to  the  angel's  question  as  im- 
parted to  himself,  because  he  was  still  more  inter- 
ested in  that  information  than  was  the  inquirer. 

■  Accordingly,  he  substitutes  himself  for  the  an- 
gel, because  the  interest  felt  by  him  in  equal 
measure  justifies  him  in  identifying  himself  to 
some  extent  with  the  questioner. — Unto  two- 
thousand  and  three-hundred  days  ("  evening- 
mornings  ")  ;  then  shall  the  sanctuary  be 
cleansed  (rather,  '-justified").  The  "  justify- 
ing of  the  sanctuary  "  is  the  re-consecrcttion  of 
the  desecrated  sanctuarj-  and  its  services  (which 
were  permitted  to  be  trodden  under  foot),  which 
is  accomplished  by  the  renewal  of  the  daily 
sacrifices.  P'^?-'!  consequently  denotes  a  being 
justified  by  that  work,  and,  in  its  position  at  the 
-head  of  the  apodosis  to  the  antecedent  clause 
beginning  with  the  connective  1?,  expresses  to 
some  extent  the  sense  of  the  fut.  exactum.  The 
material  justification  or  renewal  of  the  perfec- 
tion of  the  hast,  according  to  v.  18,  the  second 
of  the  objects  exposed  to  being  "  trodden  under 
foot,"  is  conceived  of  as  essentially  coincident 
with  that  of  the  sanctuary,  or  as  immediately 
involved  in  it,  and  for  that  reason  is  not  expressly 
mentioned.  The  neglect  to  mention  the  host 
does  not  warrant  the  conclusion  reached  by  Hit- 
nig,  under  i-eference  to  1  Mace,  v.  2  et  seq. ,  that 
lihe  author  intended  to  point  out  that  its  state 
'it  being  trodden  under  foot  was  to  be  more  pro- 
tracted, while  that  of  the  sanctuary  was  to  cease 
kt  an  earlier  date.  —The  duration  of  the  period 
jvhich  is  to  precede  the  re-dedication  of  the 
Banctuary,  is  again  indicated  by  a  mystically  in- 
definite and  equivocal  limitation  of  time,  as  in 
chap.  vii.  25.  The  2,300  evening-mornings 
(ipS  2~.5)  cannot  be  intended  to  signify  so 
many  (ktys  (as  Bertholdt,  Hiivemick,  v.  Len- 
gerke,  etc.,  assume),  for  although  the  several 
days  are,  in  Gen.  i.  5  et  seq. ,  divided  into  the  two 
parts  which  represent  them,  3'!}';  and  "ip.3,  they 
sd:e  not  numbered  accordingly  ;  and  the  Gr. 
vvx^il!'n""\  which  is  often  adduced  in  compari- 
Bon,  is  the  less  adapted  to  serve  as  an  analogy 
or  ground  of  proliability  for  the  signification  of 
evening-morning  as  synonymous  with  "  day,"  as 
"j-a  Z'XS_  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  a  compound 


word  (on  the  analogy  of  "5^?),  but  is,  on  the 
contrary,  an  asyndeton,  arising  from  the  poetic 
brevity  of  expression  in  this  section  (similar  to 
D?:0  yrDH  in  V.  13 1,  which,  so  far  from  being 
a  "  current  phrase  "  or  "  stereotyped  formula." 
occurs  only  in  this  place  as  a  designation  ol 
time.  The  limitation  of  the  expression  in  this 
sense  to  this  passage  indicates,  with  an  almost 
absolute  certainty,  that  -->■  and  --;  do  not 
signify  the  con-esponding  periods  of  the  day, 
but  rather  the  sacrifices  required  to  be  offered 
in  them.  The  whole  prophecy  relates  princi- 
pally to  the  T^^P,  to  which  the  passage  under 
consideration  assigns  an  especially  prominent 
position  ;  but  as,  according  to  Ex.  xxix.  41  (cf. 
infra,  chap.  ix.  21),  this  consists  of  a  -"l'_~"n:^ 
anda  -|:--V,  the  terms  "  evening"  and  "morn- 
ing" in' this"  place  clearly  denote  the  evening 
and  morning  sacrifices,  or,  if  it  be  preferred,  the 
times  at  which  they  were  offered.  "  Morning  '" 
and  "  evening "  are  therefore  to  be  counted 
separately  ;  *  and  thus  the  period  indicated  by 
the  author  covers  1,150  days  instead  of  2,300. 
This  period  is  nearly  equivalent  to  the  three 
and  a  half  years  in  chap.  vii.  25,  while,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  later  numbers  of  1.290 
and  1,335  days  (chap.  xii.  11  et  seq.)  exceed 
the  medium  of  three  and  a  half  years  but 
little.  How  this  discrepancy  in  the  limits 
assigned  to  the  duration  of  the  time  of  anti- 
Christian  persecution  and  oppression  is  to  be  ex- 
plained, and,  in  particular,  how  the  number  in 
this  place  is  to  be  interpreted,  is  of  course  very 
uncertain,  and  must  always  remain  undecided. 
In  generd,  those  expositors  of  the  truth  who 
always  come  nearest  to  the  sense  of  the  pro- 
phetic author,  wUl  regard  the  present  number 
1,150  as  a  designed  narroiriny,  and  the  numbers 
1,290  and  1.335  as  a  designed  extension  or  wer- 
stepping  of  the  limit  of  three  and  a  halt  years,  and 
seek  to  establish  a  conformity  to  law  both  in  the 
narrowing  and  the  extension  of  that  period.  If  it 
is  assumed  that  this  book  limits  the  year  to  360 
days  (or  to  twelve  months  of  thirty  days  each) 
besides  five  intercalated  days,  amounting  in  all 


*  [This  conclusion,  however,  if  by  no  means  certain,  as 
the  following  considerations  w-ill  serve  to  show  ;  "  n^B  2"15 
have  no  cupnla  or  conjunction  between  them  :  it  would 
therefore  seem  to  be  a  popular  mode  of  compound  expression, 
like  that  of  the  Greek  wxHl^tlx"'  C-i  Cor.  xi.  25),  in  order  to 
designate  tlie  whole  of  H  day.  Compare  Oen.  i.,  where  the 
evening  and  morning  constitute  respectively  day  the  .first, 
day  Iht  aeiond,  etc.  ;  for  it  seems  plain  that  the  phraseolipgy 
before  us  is  derived  from  this  source.   In  other  words,  ^"5 

"l~a,  as  here  employed,  may  be  admitted  to  contain  an 
allusion  to  the  morning  end  evening  sacrifices,  and  thns  the 
phrase  virtually  becomes  a  kind  of  substitution  for  T"l?pr)i 
which  is  generic,  and  includes  both  the  morning  and  the 
evening    sacriflce."— 5<"ar«.      "That   in   ver.    26  an^rt 

"IpS"'^  ((Ae  evening  and  the  mornina)  stands  for  the 
phrase  in  question,  does  not  prove  that  the  evening  and 
morning  are  reckoned  separately,  but  only  that  cveninr;- 
morning  is  a  period  of  time  consisting  of  evening  and  morn- 
ing. When  the  Hebrews  wish  to  e.>:i>rC8s  separately  day  and 
night,  the  component  parts  of  a  day  of  n  week,  then  the 
numlicr  of  both  is  expressed,  Thns  they  say,  e.g.,  firty  dayi 
and  forty  nights  (Gen,  vii,  -1.  12;  Ex..d,  xxiv,  IS;  1  Knigs 
xix.  8),  or  three  davs  and  three  nights  ( Junah  ii.  1  ;  Matt, 
xii,  4U).  but  not  e.ghty  or  six  days  and  nights  when  they 
wish  to  speak  of  forty  or  three  full  days.'  —Ktit.  ] 


CHAP.  VIIL  1-27. 


179 


to  365  days,  it  will  be  found  1 1 )  that  the  whole 
number  of  1.277  days,  which  are  necessary  to 
cover  the  period  of  three  and  a  half  years,  is 
decreased  by  127  days,  or  something  more  than 
four  months,  by  the  number  1,150  ;  i2)  that  the 
number  1,290  adds  twelve  days  or  about  half  a 
month  to  1.277  days  or  three  and  a  half  years  ; 
and  (8)  that  the  number  l.SUj  adds  fifty-eight 
days,  or  nearly  two  months,  to  the  period  of 
three  and  a  half  years  A  certain  conformity  to 
law  is  evident  from  these  figures,  inasmuch  as  the 
two  mouths  by  whicn  the  three  and  a  half  years 
are  extended  in  the  last  number,  are  added  to  the 
shorter  period  of  three  years  in  the  fii-st  {i.e.,  to 
1,095  days) ;  or,  in  other  words,  in  the  one  case 
the  prophet  regards  the  period  of  three  and  a 
half  years  as  exltitdtd  by  two  mouths,  in  the 
other  Un  the  present  passage)  as  n/torteiiid  by 
four  months.  These  piojihet  ic  limiUitwits  of  time 
correspond  generally  to  the  events  of  the  primary 
historical  fulfilment  of  this  vision  in  the  Macoa- 
basan  sera  of  oppression  and  revolt,  wUlumt  being 
chronologically  coi-ertd  by  them.  It  has  already 
been  shown,  on  chap.  vii.  25.  that  the  interval 
between  the  abrogation  of  the  daily  sacrifices  by 
Epiphanes  '  1  Mace.  i.  54)  and  the  reconsecration 
of  the  sanctuary  by  Judas  Jlaccabaaus  (ibid.  iv. 
52)  amounted  to  three  years  and  ten  days,  or 
1.105  days,  thus  covering  forty-five  days  or  one 
and  a  half  months  less  than  1,150  days,  as  here 
stated.  But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  the  arrival 
in  Judcei  of  Appollonius,  the  commissioner 
of  tribute  (1  JIacc.  i.  20),  is  taken  as  the  start- 
ing-point of  the  calculation  (as  Hitzig  does), 
a  result  of  three  and  a  quarter  years  to  the  re- 
dedication  of  the  temple  is  obtained,  with  toler- 
able exactness,  which  amounts  at  least  to  from 
one  to  one  and  a  half  months  more  than  1,150 
days.  A  comparison  of  the  larger  periods  of 
1.290  and  1,3^5  days  with  the  circumstances  of 
the  aira  of  the  religious  persecution  by  Antio- 
chus,  as  recorded  in  the  books  of  Maccabees, 
leads  to  still  more  unsatisfactory  results  (cf. 
infra,  on  chap.  xii.  1 1  et  seq, ).  Hence,  nothing 
more  definite  than  a  general  or  approximate  cor- 
respondence between  the  predicted  periods  and 
their  historical  counterparts  can  be  looked  for  ; 
or,  what  amounts  to  the  same  thing,  the  pro- 
jiheticaUy-ideal  value  of  the  numbers  in  question 
must  be  recognized.  Cf.  the  remarks  in  the 
Eth.-fund.  principles,  etc..  No.  1,  respecting  the 
nece&iity  that  the  predictions  of  any  prophet 
which  involve  numbers  should  be  only  approxi- 
mately fulfilled. — AH  the  expositors  of  this  pas- 
sage, whether  upholding  or  denying  the  compo- 
sition of  Damel's  prophecies  during  the  captiv- 
ity, are  in  the  end  obliged  to  assume  a  merely 
approximate  correspondence  of  the  number 
1,150  to  the  periods  of  the  Maccabsean  tera  of 
persecution.  Among  the  former  class,  the  view 
we  have  presented  comes  nearest  to  that  of 
Delitzsch  (p.  280),  who  holds  that,  "for  rensuus 
which  vur  knowledge  tf  hiatury  doen  not  permit  us 
to  recognize"  the  prophet's  estimate  of  the 
period  of  something  more  than  three  years, 
from  the  15th  Chisleu  145  eb.  Sel.  to  the  25th 
Chisleu  148,  is  "  somewhat  inadequate  ;  "  and 
also  to  that  of  Kranichfeld  (p.  300  et  seq. ).  who 
diverges  from  us  on  the  mode  of  estimating  the 
Juration  of  the  years  in  question,  but  is  wholly 
agreed  on  the  general  principle.  His  opinion  is 
that  here,  as  well  as  elsewhere   in  the  book, 


Daniel  estimated  the  year  at  twelve  mont  hs  ol 
thirty  days  each,  intercalating  a  month  of  thirty 
days  every  third  year.  This  results  in  exactly 
1,290  days  for  31  years,  but  leaves  a  discrepancy 
of  forty  days  between  1,150  days  and  three 
years  or  1,110  days.  With  regard  to  this  differ 
ence  he  then  observes:  "It  is  equally  in  har- 
mony with  the  vei-y  general  employment  of  the 
number  forty  in  theocratic  representations  of 
times  of  severe  trial  and  sifting  (e.g..  Gen.  vii. 
4,  12,  17;  Xum.  xiv.  33,  34;  Ezek.  iv.  U;  xxix. 
11  et  seq.  ;  1  Kings  xix.  8  ;  Matt.  vi.  1  et  seq. ), 
and  with  the  author's  general  usage  which  em- 
ploys numbers  in  an  ideal  sense  (cf .  on  iv.  1 3 ; 
vii.  25).  as  well  as  with  the  context  more  espe- 
cially, that  precisely  this  number  should  be 
found  in  combination  with  the  final  half-time. 
Consequently  the  amount  1,110  +  40  results  ae 
substantially  identical  with  the  more  direct  meas- 
urement of  the  three  and  a  half  times  in  chap.  xii. 
11;  and  this  discrepancy  within  the  book  itself 
becomes  no  more  strange  than  that,  for  instance, 
which  represents  the  same  kingdom  at  one  time 
as  divided  into  two  parts,  at  another  as  falling 
into  ten,  and  again  (see  supra,  on  v.  8)  as  sepa- 
rating into  four,  in  all  of  which  descriptions  the 
same  fundamental  idea  prevails,  although  pre- 
sented under  different  forms."  We  cannot 
adopt  this  estimate  of  the  1,150  days,  by  which 
they  are  made  to  consist  of  1,110-1-40  days,  be- 
cause it  seems  too  artificial  upon  the  whole,  and 
because  the  opinion  on  which  it  rests,  that 
Daniel  added  an  intercalary  month  of  thirty 
days  to  every  third  year  of  300  days,  seems  to 
be  untenable,  and  to  conflict  with  the  1,200 
days  or  forty-two  months  of  the  Apocalypse, 
which,    beyond   all   question,    are   synonymous 

•  with  the  three  and  a  half  years  of  this  book  (cf. 
Auberlen.  Viinitl,  etc.,  pp.  185,  ;j8(j  et  seq.  i. — 
Among  those  who  deny  the  genuineness  of  this 
book,  Ewald  approaches  our  method  of  reckon- 
ing, upon  the  whole,  inasmuch  as  he  supposes 
that  the  author  constantly  assigns  305  days  to 
the  year  ;  and  he  consequently  extends  the  1.290 
days  over  three  and  a  half  years  +  oue-half 
month,  and  the  1,335  days  over  three  and  a  half 
years  -t-  two  months ;  but  he»departs  from  our 
view  in  arbitrarily  reducing  the  number  2.300  to 
2,230,  so  as  to  obtain  only  1.115  days,  or  three 
years  +  one  month,  instead  of  1,1.50  (p.  408).  In 
opposition  to  such  critical  violence.  Hilgenfeld, 
Kamphausen,  etc. .  retain  the  reading  2,300  in  the 
text,  reckon  the  1,150  days  backwards  from  the 
dedication  of  the  temple  on  the  25th  Chisleu 
148,  and  accept  some  unknown  event  as  mark- 
ing the  beginning  of  the  1,150  days,  since  they 

j  exceed  the  period  to  the   15th  Chisleu  145  by 

I  forty  days.  Hitzig  thinks  that  only  1.105  days 
elapsed  between  the  15th  Chisleu  145  and  the 
25th  Chisleu  148,  instead  of  1,110,  and  therefore 
forty-five  less  than  2,300  evening-mornings,  and 
that  this  difference  of  one  and  a  half  months  "be- 
longs to  the  interval  between  the  abrogation  of  the 

j  "'"'?^  (1  Mace.  i.  45)  and  the  introduction  of  the 
3iU'/-i'y/iri  tyj?//;aK7f<jf  (ibid.  V.  54)."  A  hasty  glance 
at  the  description  of  these  incidents  in  1  Macca- 
bees will  be  sufficient  to  .show  that  this  interval 
of  exactly  forty  five  days  between  the  interdict 
of  the  daily  sacrifices  and  the  erection  of  the 
statue  of  Zeus  in  the  temple  is  wholly  imagin- 
ary.    Moreover,  the  critic  contradicts  himself. 


ISO 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


since  he  employs  all  his  aouteness  to  prove,  on 
chap.  Til  25,  that  the  Antiochian  persecution 
began  at  least  a  quarter  of  a  year,  or  more  than 
three  months,  before  the  1.3th  Chisleu  145,  while 
he  finds  it  proper  in  this  place  to  place  the  abro- 
gation of  the  T'^Pl,  or  the  beginning  of  the 
same  period  of  oppression,  only  one  and  a  half 
months  earUer  thim  this  date. — WhUe  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  opinion  that  the  2,300  evening- 
mornings  are  but  half  as  many  days,  fail  to 
establish  an  exact  correspondence  between  the 
prophecy  and  its  fulfilment,  those  expositors 
who  regard  the  language  as  designating  2,300 
days  succeed  no  better.  Bertholdt  and  Hiiver- 
nick  go  three  years  beyond  the  time  of  Anti- 
ochus,  to  the  defeat  of  Nicanor  (1  Mace.  vii.  43, 
4!l),  and  assign  to  that  period  2,271  days;  the 
29  days  which,  accordingly,  are  still  lacking, 
are  placed  by  Bertholdt  at  the  close  of  the 
period,  as  an  interval  between  that  victory  and 
the  consequent  celebration  of  the  triumph, 
while  Hiivernick  would  prefer  to  assign  them  to 
the  beginning,  prior  to  the  15th  Chisleu  145  (in 
opposition  to  both,  see  Hitzig,  p.  136).  On  the 
other  hand.  Dereser,  Von  Lengerke,  Wieseler 
{Die  70  Jahrirochen,  etc.,  p.  110  et  seq.),  and 
Von  Hofmann  (  Wemnrjnng  unci  Erfulliiiig,  I., 
295  et  seq.)  go  back  to  the  year  142  le.  Sel.  in 
reckoning  the  entire  period  of  about  six  years — 
Dereser  and  Hofmann  calculating  from  the  25th 
Chisleu  14S  (the  day  of  the  dedication  of  the 
temple  I.  and  Von  Lengerke  and  Wieseler  from 
the  death  of  Ant.  Epiphanes  in  the  month  of 
Shebat  148.  The  former  are  thus  carried  back 
:o  the  summer  of  the  year  142  in  fixing  the  date 
of  the  begiiming  of  the  apostasy  of  the  Jews 
who  were  seduced  by  Antiochus,  Von  Lengerke 
to  Sivan,  or  the  third  month,  and  Wieseler  only 
to  the  feast  of  tabernacles  in  the  same  year, 
142.  Wieseler  himself  afterwards  recognized 
the  untenable  character  of  this  method  of  reck- 
oning, and  therefore  acknowledged  his  conver- 
sion to  the  exegetically  more  correct  view  enter- 
tained by  a  m.ajority  of  moderns,  which  estimates 
only  1,150  days,  in  his  subsequent  essay  in  the 
GOtt.  Gelchi  ten- A/izeigcn,  ISiti."     [The  author, 

*  [These  difficulties  in  the  way  of  the  literal  exactness  of 
the  period  in  question  as  applicable  to  the  history  of  the  per- 
secution by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  are  drawn  out  in  detail 
by  Keil,  p.  3iJ2  et  seq.,  who  does  not,  however,  add  anything 
ot  importance  to  what  the  author  adduces.  They  seem  to 
us  to  be  fairly  met  by  the  following  explanation  of  Stuart  in 
his  Commentary,  p.  'J^  et  seq.  :  "And  then  nhall  that  which 
is  holy  be  vindicated,  p'^^'2\  shall  lutve  justice  done,  i.e., 

the  rights  of  the  sanctuary  sh.iU  be  effectually  restored,  its 
claims  shall  be  vindicated.  This  was  dune  when  Judas 
Maccaba-'US,  after  the  three  and  a  half  years  in  which  all 
temple  rites  had  been  suspended,  and  heathen  sacrifices  had 
been  offered  there,  made  a  thorough  expurgation  of  every- 
thing pertaining  to  the  temple,  and  restored  its  entil'e  ser- 
vices. This  was  on  the  SSth  of  Dec,  165  B.  C,  just  three 
years  from  the  time  when  swine's  fle.sh  was  first  offered 
there  by  Antiochus.  We  have  then  the  terminus  ad  qitem 
of -the  y,.'iUO  days ;  and  it  is  not  difficult,  therefore,  to  find 
the  terrnlnUH  a  quo.  These  days,  at  thirty  in  a  month 
(which  is  clearly  the  prophetic  mode  of  reckoning),  make 
bLx  years,  four  months,  and  twenty  days.  Dec.  25th  of  171 
makes  six  years,  and  the  four  months  and  twenty  days  ivUl 
bring  the  time  to  the  latter  half  of  July  in  the  same  year. 
i.e.,  171  B.  C.  Dur.ng  this  year,  Menelaus,  the  high-priest 
appointed  by  Antiochus  on  the  gi-ound  of  a  proffered  bribe, 
rifled  the  temple  of  many  of  the  treasures  to  pay  that  blibe, 
and  in  this  transaction  he  was  assisted  by  liis  brother  Lysi- 
machus.  The  regular  and  lawful  high-priest,  Oiiias  lU., 
frh't  hiKl  been  rern-jvetl,  severely  reproved  ihis  sacrilege  com- 
mitted by  his  brethren ;  and  afterward,  through  fear  of 
tbem,  fled  for  refuge  to  Daphne,  an  asylum  near  Antioch, 


it  will  be  perceived,  ignores  that  class  of  inter 
preters,  quite  common  in  this  country  and  Great 
Britain,  but  comparatively  rare  in  Germany,  whc 
understand  by  the  days  in  question  so  many 
yearx,  and  generally  apply  the  prophecy  to  the 
continuance  of  the  papal  supremacy.  There  is, 
however,  a  great  discrepancy  among  these  inter- 
preters as  to  the  point  of  time  from  which  to 
date  the  period  spoken  of,  as  well  as  some  diver- 
sity as  to  its  length,  whether  2,300  years  or  only 
1,150  years,  although  the  majority  prefer  the 
latter.  It  would  be  a  tedious,  and,  in  our  opin- 
ion, a  bootless  task,  to  follow  them  into  all  the 
details  of  their  historical  investigation.--,  compu- 
tations, and  comparisons.  Others,  adopting  the 
same  substitution  of  years  for  '"  days,"  apply 
the  prophecy  to  the  rise  and  sway  of  Mohamme- 
danism, and  make  out  the  requisite  dates  as  best 
they  can.  It  is  an  adequate  answer  to  all  these 
interpretations  to  say  that  such  a  meaning  of 
the  word  (lay  has  no  sufficient — if  any — warrant 
in  Scripture  use,  and  certainly  is  not  hinted  at 
in  this  entire  passage.  A  calm  but  fundamen- 
tal refutation  of  the  theory  in  question  is  given 
by  Tregelles,  Remarks  on  Diiidel  (Lond.,  1804, 
5th  ed. ),  p.  110  et  seq.  It  is  aJso  abundantly 
met  by  Stuart  in  his  Vmnmeiitary  mi  the  A-poca- 
lypse,  II.  459  seq.  Elliott,  the  strongest  advo- 
cate of  this  theory,  admits  (Hurai  Apoailyjiticee, 
II.  905)  that  it  was  unknown  till  the  close  of 
the  fourteenth  century,  when  it  was  first 
broached  by  Walter  Brute.  It  came  into  vogue 
with  the  Reformation,  and  owes  its  prevalence, 
not  to  any  sound  exegetical  support,  but  to  the 


in  Syria.  Thence  he  was  allured  by  the  false  promises  of 
Menelaus,  and  perfidiously  murdered  by  the  king's  lieuten- 
ant, Andronicus.  See  the  whole  story  in  '.i  Mace.  iv.  27  seq. 
The  Jews  at  Jerusalem,  incensed  by  the  violent  death  of 
tlieir  lawful  high-priest,  and  by  the  sacrilegious  robberies  of 
Menelaus  and  Lysimachus,  became  tumultuous,  and  a  severe 
contest  took  pljice  between  them  and  the  adherents  of  those 
who  committed  the  robbery,  in  which  the  patriotic  Jews  at 
last  gained  the  victory,  and  Lysimachus  was  slain  at  the 
treasury.  This  was  the  first  contest  that  took  place  between 
the  friends  of  Antiochus  and  the  adherents  to  the  Hebrew 
laws  and  usages.  The  whole  of  it  was  occasioned  by  the 
baseness  of  Antiochus  in  accepting  bribes  for  bestowing  the 
office  of  high-priest  on  those  who  had  no  just  claim  to  it. 
The  payment  of  the  bribes  occasioned  the  robbing  of  the 
temple  and  the  sacrilege  committed  there;  and  this  was  the 
commencement  of  thnt  long  series  of  oppression,  (lersecu- 
tion,  and  bloodshed  which  took  place  in  the  sequel  under 
Antiochus. 

"  We  have,  indeed,  no  data  in  ancient  history  by  which 
the  very  day,  or  even  month,  connected  wth  the  transac 
tions  above  related  can  be  exactly  ascertained.  But  the 
j/ear  is  certain  ;  and,  as  the  time  seems  to  be  definite  in  our 
t«xt,  the  fair  presuniption  is,  that  the  outiireak  of  the  popu- 
lace and  the  battle  that  followed  constitutes  the  terminus  a 
quo  of  the  2,yUll  days.     See  Froelich,  Annates  Reg.  .Vyr.,  p. 

46 ;  and  also  Usher's  Chronol As  to  the  difference 

between  the  time  here,  viz.,  2,300  days,  and  the  three  and  a 
half  years  in  vii.  *25,  if  the  reader  narrowly  inspects  the  lat- 
ter, he  will  perceive  that  the  time  there  specified  has  rela- 
tion to  the  period  during  which  Antiochus  entirely  prohib- 
ited the  Jewish  religion  in  every  shape.  This  period,  as  is 
well  known,  corresponds  with  historic.il  facts.  In  the  pas- 
sage before  us  a  more  extensive  series  of  events  is  comprised, 
as  vs.  10-1*2  indicate.  They  begin  with  a.ssaults  on  the 
priesthood  (which  we  have  seen  to  be  matter  of  fact,  as 
stated  above),  and  enil  with  the  desecration  and  prostration 
of  all  that  is  sacred  and  holy.  It  is  unnecessary  to  show 
that  each  of  the  things  described  belongs  to  each  and  every 
part  of  the  2,300  day.s.  Enough  th.lt  the  events  are  sticces- 
sive,  and  -spread  over  the  time  specified  in  our  text.  The 
trampling  down  nr  degradation  of  the  priesthood  and  the 
sanctuary  commenced  the  whole  series  of  oppression  and 
persecution,  and  this,  with  most  aggravated  acts  of  sacrilege 
and  blasphemy,  was  also  the  consummation  of  the  tyrant'? 
outrages."  Cowles  gives  a  similar  explanation  in  detail 
Com>iientai%  p.  878  et  seo.J 


CHAP.  VIII.  1-27. 


ISJ 


polemical  spirit  of  the  times,  which  has  seized 
upon  it  as  a  popular  weapon  against  papacy.  ] 

Verses  15-19.  Preparatory  to  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  vijiwn  of  the  ram  and  the  he-goat. 
And  .  .  .  when  I  .  .  .  sought  for  the  mean- 
ing, namely,  of  the  entire  vision  that  was  seen. 
The  seeking  was  purely  subjective,  and  not  ex- 
pressed in  the  form  of  a  question  addressed  to 
the  angel  (Von  Leng. ),  nor  in  a  silent  prayer  to 
God  (Havemick). — Behold,  there  stood  before 
me  (one),  as  the  appearance  of  a  man,  i.e.,  ap- 
pearing like  a  man.  The  expression  "behold, 
there  stood,"  etc.,  indicates  the  startling  and 
extraordinary  character  of  the  apparition,  which 
argued  something  terrible  and  superhuman  (cf. 
Job  iv.  16);  the  "?3  HK^'^S  then  follows  to 
denote  the  encouraging  effect  produced  on  the 
seer  by  the  taanlike  appearance  of  the  form. 
The  term  "l^J  is  employed  instead  of  CIH  or 
■i:;i;s,  doubtless  in  allusion  to  the  name  of  the 
angel,  which  is  given  below,  in  v.  16 ;  see  on 
that  pass.ige,  and  cf.  chap.  ix.  21.  where  the 
same  angel  is  designated  as  "  the  man  Gabriel," 
but  where  his  super-human  nature  is  also  very 
clearly  implied  (in  his  "  flying"). — Verse  16.  And 
I  heard  a  man's  voice  between  (the)  Ulai,  i.e., 
between  the  two  branches  of  the  Eulseus ;  cf. 
supra,  onv.  3.  V?  does  not  stand  for  V?'?,  as 
if  the  voice  only,  and  not  also  the  listener,  were 
stationed  between  the  TJIai ;  nor  does  ^3^6*  V3 
signify  "between  the  banks  of  the  Ulai" 
(against  Von  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  etc.). — Gabriel, 
make  this  man  to  understand  the  vision. 
;st"'T23,  i.e.,  "man  of  God,"oralso  "man-god" 
(according  to  Ewald,  "  a  God  who  kindly  conde- 
scends to  man"),  is  the  name  of  one  of  the 
principal  angels  or  angel-princes  (cf.  Luke  i.  19), 
one  of  the  apxayyeAoi  or  D"'"^  (chap.  x.  13  et 
seq.),  whose  number  is  fixed  at  seven  in  Rev. 
viii.  2  {<H  i—ra  I'v.  jc/o'.  ol  'tvCi-iov  rov  i^toh  efjTijKatjt), 
equal  to  that  of  the  nmjiha,<ipands,  who  stand 
beside  Ormuzd  as  a  divine  council,  according 
to  the  ancient  religious  books  of  Parseeism. 
The  Scriptural  archangels,  however,  of  whom 
another,  Michael,  is  mentioned  hereafter  in  this 
book,  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  identical  with 
the  Ame.^haxpentas  of  Parseeism;  for  (1)  the 
number  seven  in  the  latter  case  is  obtained  only 
by  adding  Ormuzd  himself  to  six  others  ;  (2) 
they  are  not  represented  as  angels  or  servants  of 
God.  but  as  being  themselves  divine,  and  as 
governing  determined  portions  of  creation  in 
that  char.acter,  e.g..  Bohumarm  (Bohman)  gov- 
erns the  sky,  Ardihesht  the  fire,  Sapandomad 
the  earth,  etc.  ;  (8)  the  7iames  of  the  anuha- 
upandt  are  as  thoroughly  Persian  or  Aryan  in 
their  character  as  those  of  the  Scriptural  arch- 
angel, so  far  as  they  occur  in  the  Holy  Bible 
(namely,  Gabriel  and  Michael,  and  Raphael  in  i 
the  Apocrypha,  Tob.  iii.  25  ;  xii.  12  et  seq.)  are 
specifically  Shemitic,  and  bear,  by  virtue  of  the 
ending  ;f<  in  each  case,  a  thoroughly  monothe- 
istic character;  (4)  the  attempts  to  establish 
the  identity  of  individual  anuhnsiinnd.t  with 
individual  archangels  of  the  Bible  must  be  re- 
garded, without  exception,  as  failures  ;  e.  g. , 
the   supposed    recognition   of    Chordad   (Haur- 


vatat)  in  the  Apocalyptic  "angel  of  the  waters," 
Rev.  xvi.  5  (Hitzig  ;  also  Hilgenf did,  Dasjuden- 
thum  im  pers.  Zeitalter,  in  the  ZeitscJir.  f.  win- 
senseJuiftl.  Theologie,  1866,  No.  4),  the  proposed 
identifying  of  Gabriel  with  Crao.^ha  and  ol 
Michael  with  Bohman  (by  Alex.  Kohut,  Uebei 
diejiidische  Angelokif/ie  tind  Vdmonolngie  in  ihrer 
Abhdngigkeit  vom  ParsiJimus,"  in  Abhandlungen 
der  Deutsch.  Morgenl.  GeselUchuft.  vol.  IV.  No. 
3).  Cf.  Haneberg,  in  Reusch's  Theolog.  Litera- 
turbl,  1867,  No.  3,  p.  72;  also  D(jllinger,  Hei- 
denthum  nnd  Judenthuin,  p.  361  ;  M.  Haug, 
E.'isays  on  the  sacred  language,  writings,,  and 
religion  of  the  Parseen,  Bombay-,  1862. — Ewald 
appears  inclined  to  regard  Gabriel  not  as  one  of 
the  superior  angels,  but  as  occupying  an  inter- 
mediate or  inferior  rank,  since  he  designates 
the  "  man's  voice  "  which  calls  to  him  as  that 
of  a  still  higher  angel.  This  assumption,  how- 
ever, is  unnecessary ;  it  is  conceivable  that  an 
angel  of  equal  rank  may  have  given  him  this 
direction,  or,  if  this  should  not  be  preferred, 
that  God  Himself,  giving  a  human  sound  to 
His  voice  that  He  might  be  heard  by  Daniel,  ad- 
dressed the  angel. — It  must  remain  undecided 
whether  the  "  man's  voice  "  is  to  be  considered 
as  belonging  to  the  former  of  the  S'"i'lp  who 
were  speaking  together  in  v.  13,  while  Gabriel 
is  to  be  identified  with  the  questioner  in  that 
place  (as  Hitzig  supposes),  since  the  author  has 
not  definitely  indicated  such  an  identity.  — Verse 
17.  So  he  came  near  where  I  stood;  literally, 
"  beside  my  standing"  (cf.  v'.  18i.  Luther  ren- 
ders it,  "and  he  came  hard  by  me" — And 
when  (or  "as")  he  came,  I  was  afraid,  and 
fell  upon  my  face.  Cf.  chap,  x  9  ;  Ezek.  i.  2S; 
xliii.  3  ;  Rev.  i.  17. — Understand,  O  son  of 
man  ( — this  address  is  probably  rai'delled  after 
Ezekiel — ) ;  for  at  ths  time  of  the  end  shall 
be  the  vision  j  rather,  "  for  the  vision  is  for 
the  final  time,"  i.e.,  it  refers  to  the  final  period 
of  earthly  history  ;  cf.  v.  19  *,  26.  [But  these 
verses  do  not  warrant  this  interpretation.  See 
below.]  The  words  are  not  designed  to  com- 
fort, but  to  direct  attention  to  the  impressive 
and  alarming  nature  of  the  prophecy,  in  which, 
according  to  the  following  context,  they  are  suc- 
oe6.sful. — Verse  18.  Now  as  he  was  speaking 
with  me,  I  was  in  a  doep  sleep  on  my  face 
towEtrd  the  ground ;  rather,  "  and  while  he 
was  speaking  with  me,  I  fell  stunned  upon  my 
face  to  the  ground."  Not  until  this  repeated 
falling  down  in  terror  did  the  "  benumbing"  or 
Divine  cKn-noir  take  place,  as  the  immediate 
presence  of  God  for  the  purpose  of  imparting  to 
the  prophet  a  highly  important  revelation,  was 
not  realized  until  then.  Cf.  the  case  of  Moses 
(Ex.  xxxiii.  20),  Isaiah  (Isa.  vi.  5),  Peter,  John, 
and  James,  on  the  mount  of  transfiguration 
(Luke  ix.  32),  Paul  and  his  com|ianions  near 
Damascus  (Acts  ix.  4;  xxii.  7;  xxvi.  12),  etc. — 
But  he  touched  me,  and  set  me  upright.  Cf. 
X.  10  et  seq.  ;  Neh.  ix.  3,  etc. — Verse  19.  Be- 
hold ....  what  shall  be  in  the  last  end  oi 
the  indignation,  namely,  of  the  Divine  indig- 
nation upon  the  godless  world  (the  o/))'/  iicyuAT), 
1  Mace.  i.  64  ;  cf.  Rom.  ii.  5  ;  Isa.  x,  5,  25  ; 
xxvi.  20;  Jer.  1.  5),  which  naturally  will  be 
manifested  most  strongly  toward  the  close  of 
human  history,  when  the  tares  of  wickedness 
shall   flourish  most  luxuriantly  (see  v.  23  .and 


1S2 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Matt.  xiii.  30.  39;  cf.  Matt.  xxiv.  9  et  seq.). 
For  this  reason  the  last  timts  shall  constitute  a 
period  of  great  tribulation  and  woes  (i^/'i/'f'S', 
Ljildff — Matt.  xxiv.  7  et  seq  ). — For  at  the  time 
appointed  the  end  shall  be;  rather,  "for  it 
relates  to  the  point  of  time  of  the  end."  The 
subject  here,  as  in  v.  17  ft,  is  the  vision  (ITH"), 
or  rather  its  contents,  which,  according  to  this 
HS.su ranee  from  the  angel,  refers  to  the  7P.  "^".1'-' 
the  determined  point  of  time  of  the  end."  * 

Verses  20-26.  Tlie  interpreUitwn  of  the  visiiyn. 
On  V.  20,  cf.  supra,  on  v.  3;  concerning  v.  21, 
on  V.  5. — The  king  cf  Graecia;  properly,  of 
Javan  (V"^).  By  this  term  the  Hebrews  desig- 
nated all  the  Hellenic  lands  and  peoples,  because 
the  lonians  (Homer,  'hutm;)  dwelt  in  the  e-astern 
portions  of  Hellas,  and-  through  their  colonies 
in  Asia  Minor  were  the  first  to  become  acquaint- 
ed with  the  Asiatics.  The  Egyptians,  ancient 
Persians,  and  Indians  appear  likewise  to  have 
constantly  denominated  the  whole  body  of  Grae- 
cian  nations  as  lonians  or  Jaonians  ;  .^Eschylus 
and  Aristophanes,  at  least,  introduce  Persians 
as  employing  the  term  '\<inn<; instead  of  'E/Z-i/ifr. 
Cf-  generally,  Knobel,  Vulkertfifd,  p.  78  et  seq. 
— Verse  22.  Notv  that  being  broken,  whereas 
four  stood  up  for  it;  rather,  "  and  that  which 
was  broken,  and  in  whose  stead  four  stood  up," 
It  should  have  read,  properly,  "and  concerning 
this,  that  it  (the  great  horn)  was  broken,  and 
that  in  its  stead  four  stood  up  ;  "  but  instead  of 
this,  ~"ip:n"J  stands  abruptly  at  the  beginning 
(cf.  vii.  17).  and  the  ecbactic  'l3T  nnttsni, 
"  and  four  stood  up,"  etc.,  is  subordinate  to  that 


*  tKeil,  however,   justly  remarks :    "  But  yj^TlTi  the 
H'n^  of  the  end,  and  yp   "^yiTZ,  the  appointed  time  of  the 

end,  19  not  the  absolute  end  of  all  things,  the  time  of  the 
setting  up  of  the  retjutnn  gtorifv,  and  the  time  of  the  tribu- 
lation preceding  the  return  of  the  Lord  ;  but  the  time  of  the 
judgment  of  the  world-kingdom  and  the  setting  up  of  the 
everlasting  kingdom  of  G-od  by  the  appeai'ance  of  the  Mes- 
Biah.  the  end  of  aluiv  oyros  and  the  commencement  of  the 
aiwf  jneAAwi',  the  time  of  the   Q'i?Q'nn   n^"ini<  (chap.  ix. 

14).  which  an  apostle  calls  (1  Cor,  x.  11)  rd  reATj  Toti-  aluivmv, 
and  speaks  of  as  having  then  already  come.'"  Stuart  still 
more  correctly  says:  ''End  of  what?  Of  Antiochus?  or 
of  a  troublous  state  of  things  ?  or  end  of  the  world  ?  Not 
merely  of  Antiochus:  for  his  importance,  as  exhibited  in 
the  book  of  Daniel,  arises  principally  from  his  power  to 
annoy  the  people  of  God.  Not, the  end  of  ttie  world  :  for  in 
chap.  viiL  no  Messianic  period  is  developed  at  the  close  of 
It-i  predictions,  and  yet  the  Messianic  reign  is  itself  the  end 
or  last  time  of  the  world.  Ver.  19  gives  ns  perhaps  more 
light;  Oy^tl  ri^"*ni!52,  in  the  latter  time  of  the  indigna- 
tion, i.e.,  the  latter  time  of  afflictions  permitted  to  be 
brought  upon  Israel,  because  of  the  divine  indignation 
against  their  sins.  The  vi-sion  itself  in  fact  reaches  only  to 
the  enfl  of  those  special  afflictions  that  are  to  come  on  the 
people  of  the  Jews  be/ore  the  Messianic  period,  and  which 
are  made  the  subject  of  prophecy  because  of  their  impor- 
tance. The  warning  to  mark  ipett  or  von^tider  the  vision, 
because  it  discloses  these  afflictions,  connects  itself  of  course 
with  a  supposed  importance  attached  to  the  knowledge  of 
the  final  special  troubles  of  the  Jews  before  the  coming  of 
the    Messiah.      The  Kabbins   call    these   trouble-i  ^b-H 

T^23^."  In  other  words,  as  Keil  presently  says  m  >re  dis- 
tinctly, "  Q2.'^n  ifi  the  wrath  of  God  against  Israel,  the  pun- 

Uhment  *A-hich  God  hung  over  them  on  account  of  their 
«ins.  as  in  Isa.  x.  5  :  Jer.  xxv,  11 ;  Ezek,  xxii.  24,  et^,.  and 
here  the  sufferings  of  pimishment  and  discipline  w.'lich  the 
little  horn  shall  bring  over  lai-uel."] 


term  in  its  absolute  position.  —  Pour  kingdom] 
shall  stand  up  out  of  the  nation ;  ~:"!?ar'^,  an 
archaism  (Gen,  xxx.  38;  1  Sam.  vi.  12),  that 
here  seems  to  be  renewed  under  the  influence 
of  the  Chaldee  element, — But  not  in  his  power. 
The  suffix  in  inSa  does  not  refer  back  to  "'13':  i 

but  to  ^r'?'?  in  y-  21  ft.  The  power  of  the  first 
great  Gra3cian  conqueror  shall  not  descend  to  the 
kingdoms  which  spring  from  his  empire  ;  they 
shall  not  equal  him,  neither  singly,  nor  all  taken 
together, — Verse  23.  And  in  the  latter  time  of 
their  kingdom,  when  the  transgressors  are 
come  to  the  full,  namely,  of  the  measure  of 
their  wicked  plans  and  actions  ;  cf.  the  same 
elliptic  usage  of  onn  in  chap,  ix,  24  Keri,  and 
in  addition  Gen.  xv.  16  ;  2  Mace.  vi.  14 ;  Matt, 
xxiii.  33;  1  Thess.  ii.  16.  The  S^JSTQ  who  are 
here  charged  with  ' '  filling  the  measure  of  their 
sins  "  are  not  the  Israelites  who  have  forsaken 
Jehovah  and  His  law  (Dereser,  Von  Lengerke, 
Kranichfeld),  but,  without  doubt,  the  enemies 
of  God's  people,  the  heathen  oppressors  of  the 
saints  of  the  Most  High;  for  the  term  2i;tL"S 
alludes  with  sufficient  clearness  to  i'r  E  in  vs. 
6,  12,  and  13.  For  the  opinion  that  this  does 
not  probably  refer  to  the  servants  and  abettors 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  but  rather  to  his  pre- 
decessors, see  supra,  on  v.  9.  * — A  king  of  fierce 
(rather,  "insolent")  countenance,  and  under- 
standing dark  sentences,  shall  stand  up. 
D^:E  tV,  properly,  "of  hard  countenance"  (cf. 
Deut.  xxviii.  50 ;  Isa.  xix.  4).  The  predicate 
probably  refers  chiefly  to  the  blasphemous  say- 
ings of  the  tyrant,  see  chap,  vii,  3  et  seq.  The 
following  predicate,  niin  Vt*?!  "versed  in 
riddles,"  denotes  his  art  of  cunning  dissimula- 
tion, b.y  which  he  is  able  to  conce.al  his  purposes 
from  both  friend  and  foe;  cf,  v,  2.'>.  and  xi,  21, 
27. — Verse  24,  And  his  power  shall  be  mighty, 
but  not  by  his  own  power.  The  implied 
thought  is.  "but  by  Divine  permission;"  cf. 
vs.  12  and  13,  and  also  Isa.  x.  5  et  seq.  ;  1  Sam. 
ii.  9,  etc. — It  is  incorrect  to  supply,  with  Dere- 
ser, Von  Lengerke,  etc,  an  antithe,sis  to  "not 
by  his  own  power,"  so  that  it  will  read  "  but  by 
his  cuniii/ig."  rna  sb  is  a  litotes,  which, 
exactly  similar  to  the  expression  ' '  without 
hand"  (chap,  ii,  34  and  infra,  v.  25).  alludes  to 
the  superhuman  providence  of  God  as  com- 
pared to  human  power,  which  is  never  more 
than  impotence. — And  he  shall  destroy  won- 
derfully, and  shall  prosper;  r"S<;E;,  an  ad- 
verb, as  in  Job  xxxvii,  5,  For  what  remains, 
cf,  supra,  V.  12  A. — And  shall  destroy  the 
mighty  (ones)  and  the  holy  people.     The  I  in 

^^H"?'?!  is  explicative  ;  it  is  designed  to  denote 
more  particularly  the  respects  in  which  the  king 
shall  prosper.  The  "  mighty  ones"  are  the  war- 
like enemies  over  whom  he  shall  triumph,  and 
to  them  are   added,  by  way  of  contrast,  the 


*  [Stuart  and  Keil.  on  the  contrary,  strongl.v  maintain 
that  "the  transgre,ssors"  here  are  not  the  heathen,  but  the 
apostate  Jews,  whose  sin  will  be  visited  by  the  indignatior 
of  God  :  and  this  seems  to  be  more  appropriate  to  the  whole 
connection.] 


CH-VP.  Vlll.  1-27 


ISJ 


"nation  of  saints''  (cf.  vii.  18,  22),  as  unwar- 
like  opponents.  In  the  opinion  of  Hitzig, 
Ewald,  etc.,  the  3"'':^^ J  are  the  three  preten- 
ders to  the  crown  whom  Epiphanes  was  com- 
pelled to  depose  ;  but  not  one  of  these  deserved 
to  be  called  a  mighty  one,  not  even  the  usurper 
Heliodorus  ;  see  supra,  on  chap.  vii.  8,  25.* — 
Verse  25.  And  through  (rather,  "according 
to  ")  his  policy  he  shaU  cause  craft  to  prosper 
in  his  hand.  'Z^'^'Z^  is  probably  not  "by 
reason  of."  but  "according  to  his  cunning  ;  "  of. 
Psa.  ex.  4  ;  Esth.  lx.  20,  etc.  This  expression, 
ia  an  absolute  position  at  the  beginning,  is  con- 
nected with  the  principal  sentence  which  fol- 
lows by  an  emphatic  1 ;  cf .  Gesenius,  Tlietaur. , 
p.  390  a.  rf^ISn  jg  not  transitive  (Hitzig,  et 
al. ),  as  if  the  following  ~^~^  were  its  accusa- 
tive, but  probably  intransitive,  despite  the  fem. 
r?3"in ;  cf.  Isa.  liii.  10. — "In  (or  with)  his 
hand  "  (cf.  Isa.  xliv.  20),  considered  as  the  out- 
ward sphere  of  action,  seems  intended  to  form 
an  antithesis  to  the  following  "in  his  heart." 
Concerning  'i-^?-?  and  the  signification  of  -"'1?7 
which  results  from  it,  cf.  supra,  on  v.  4. — And 
by  peace  shall  destroy  many;  rather,  "and 
unawares  shall  destroy  many."  ~'^3~:^  does 
not  exactly  signify  "in  the  midst  of  profound 
peace"  (.Job  xv.  21),  but  more  indefinitely, 
"  with  suddenness,  by  a  malignant  surprise,"  an 
illustration  of  the  malice  and  dissimulation  prac- 
tised by  this  t>Tant,  which  were  already  men- 
tioned in  V.  28.  The  circumstance  that  it  is 
recorded  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  in  1  Mace.  i. 
30,  ^'ii  kit^TTeaev  l~l  t/'/v  tto/h'  i^a-tva,  proves 
nothing  in  favor  of  a  vntic.  ex  ereiitu,  beyond 
the  fact  that  malignant  and  sudden  surprises 
are  necessarily  practised  by  every  warlike  foe  of 
cruel  dispo.sition.  ["In  the  -"^'^  (many)  are 
comprehended  'the  mighty  (one)  and  the  holy 
people'  iver.  24)." — Kfil.] — He  shall  also  stind 
UD  against  the  Prince  of  prince?,  etc.  Cf.  v.  i 
11.  and  with  regard  to  the  being  "  broken  with-  I 
oat  hand,"  cf.  chap.  ii.  34  ;  also  Job  xxxiv.  20  ' 
and  Lam.  iv.  (5.  It  is  not  necessary  to  seek  a 
definite  reference  to  the  death  of  Ejiiphanes  by 
sickness  or  extraordinary  accident  in  this  pas- 
sage, instead  of  permitting  him  to  fall  on  the 
battle-field,  or  by  the  hand  of  a  murderer 
(against  Bertholdt,  Von  Lengerke,  Hiivemick, 
etc.  ).f — Verse  2(5.  And  the  vision  of  the  even 


*  ['*  O^T^^i^  doofl  not  here  signify  many^  numerous, 
mftny  indivi  Inal  Israelites  (Von  Leng.,  Slaurer,  Kliefotfl 
[Btuart]),  partly  because  in  ver.  25  D''^'^  stands  for  that, 

partly  because  of  the  C'^~~p  25,  by  which  we  are  to 

undei-stand  the  people  of  fm-aet." — Keil.\ 

t  ["The  language  is  adaptctl  to  the  .symbol,  namely,  the 
little  horn.  The  meaning  is.  IntaUtj  destroi/ed.  Facts  cof- 
Tespond.  According  to  history.  Antiochus.  after  marching 
Into  Persia,  and  robbing  the  temple  at  Elymats,  was  driven 
a-.vay  by  popular  tumult :  and  on  his  return  back  towards 
Syria,  be  was  met  with  the  news  of  the  total  defeat  of  his 
army  in  Judaea,  and  of  the  restoration  of  the  temple  -services 
there.  Polybius  i  XXXI.  U)  says  of  him,  that  ^  lie  fell  mad 
(6oi/ioi''i<rtt«)  and  died  :'  1  Mace.  vi.  8  relates  that  he  fell  .sick 
of  erief  for  his  losses ;  Appian( />t?7^^.  .Vj/r.,  LXVI.)  says  sim- 
ply :  i^Siviav  eTeA«ur)j(r«.  Various  sha.ies  are  given  t«j  the 
picture  by  the  different  writers;  e.g.,  in  1  Mace.  vi.  ?<  seq.. 
which  narrates  his  penitent  confessions.     But  these  have  a 


ing  and  the  morning  which  was  told,  namely, 
in  v.  14.  Since  the  observation  in  that  place 
respecting  the  2,300  evenmg-mornings  was  really 
a  :Q"4:'?,  and  not  a  •IS-':,  the  words  ">'?»«:  —is 
seem  to  refer  back  to  the  genitive  l^l  -".^n- 
instead  of  to  the  Stnt.  Cim-str.  (thus  Hitzig) 
Words  and  things  told,  however,  form  the  sub 
ject  of  visions  in  other  cases  also  (cf.  Isa.  ii.  1  ; 
Am.  i.  1;  Hab.  ii.  1,  etc.);  and  the  remark 
concerning  the  2,300  evening-mornings  may  con- 
sequently be  termed  a  "vision  "  in  this  instance. 
— Is  true  (r.ather  "truth"),  /.<'.,  it  is  correct, 
deserves  to  be  credited,  inasmuch  as  2,300  even- 
ing-mornings must  elapse  before  the  end  of  the 
period  of  affliction.  That  period  is  thus  deter- 
mined as  an  extended  one,  which  shall  not  soon 
reach  its  close.  On  P?*,  cf.  chap.  x.  1 ;  xi.  2; 
alsoxii.  7;  Jer.  xxri.  15;  xxviii.  9;  Rev.  xix. 
9;  xxi.  5;  x.Kii.  0. — 'Wherefore  shut  thou  up 
the  vision;  rather,  "and  thou,  conceal  the 
vision,"  i.e. ,  do  not  publish  it.  do  not  be  anxious 
to  spread  a  report  concerning  it.  --;  is  noi 
equivalent  to  3.- n.  "to  seal  up"  (Theodotion 
Hiivemick,  Von  Lengerke) ;  for  "  sealing"  ia 
added  to  the  mere  "  concealing"  in  chap.  xii.  4, 
as  a  strengthening  term. — For  it  shall  be  for 
many  days,  i.e.,  it  (the  vision)  shall  retain  its 
prophetic  value  for  a  long  period,  it  does  not 
relate  to  a  near,  but  to  a  distant  future;  cf. 
chap.  xii.  4.  9.  As  the  direction  to  conceal  the 
vision  is  here  based  on  the  consideration  that  a 
long  period  must  elapse  before  it  shall  be  ful- 
filled, so,  on  the  contrary,  the  prophet  is  direct- 
ed, in  Rev.  xxii.  10,  not  to  seal  what  has  been 
revealed  to  him,  because  the  time  of  its  fulfil- 
ment is  near.  Notice  the  difference  between 
the  Old-Testament  seer,  who  is  far  removed 
from  the  final  future,  and  only  sees  it  primarily 
in  types  {e.g.',  instead  of  beholding  the  antichrist 
he  only  sees  his  forerunner  Epiphanes),  and  the 
New-Testament  prophet,  who  beholds  the  events 
of  the  last  times  in  the  history  of  the  world 
much  nearer  at  hand,  and  is  therefore  not 
obliged  to  conceal  the  prophecies  relating  to 
them,  especially  since  he  addresses  a  commun- 
nitj'  composed  exclusively  of  t^fo^^ftJavro/  (Isa. 
liv.  3 ;  John  vi.  45 ;    cf.   1  John  ii.  20,  27). 

Verse  27.  T/ie  effect  of  f/ie  vision  upon  the,  pro- 
phet. And  I  Daniel  fainted,  anil  was  sick 
(certain)  days.  Cf.  vii.  28,  and  especially  chap. 
ii.  1,  in  relation  to  '^""'■^.r'J. — Afterwcird  I  rose 
up,  namely,  from  the  sick-bed.  This  formal 
statement  by  the  prophet  cannot  be  regarded  as 
extraordinary,  since  not  only  the  vision  as  such 
(i.e.,  by  reason  of  its  startling  character),  but 
also  the  fasting  which  preceded  it  (cf.  chap.  ix. 
3  ;  X.  2  et  seq. ),  comes  under  consideration  as 
the  cause  of  the  complete  exhaustion  which  fol- 
lowed.— And  did  the  king's  business.  Con- 
cerning the  extent  to  which  Daniel  might  have 
transacted  official  business  for  the  king  in  the 
reign  of  Belshazzar,  without  being  personally 
known  to  him,  see  on  chap.  v.  7. — And  was 
astonished    at   (rather,    "  dumb   concerning") 

strong  tinge  of  .Jetrish  coloring.  So  much  is  undoubtedly 
true,  viz.,  that  he  perished  suddenly  by  a  Tiolent  sickness, 
dur  ng  which  he  proliably  fell  into  a  state  of  mania.  He 
died,  therefore,  without  violence  by  the  hand  of  man,  and 
so  as  to  make  a  deep  impression  of  perishing  by  a  pecuiiat 
visitation  of  God." — Stuart,] 


1S4 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


the  vision,  but  ("and")  none  understood 
(rather,  "became  aware  of")  it;  usually  ren- 
dered, "none  vndentood  it,"  or,  "and  to  me 
there  was  no  understanding,  /  did  not  under- 
stand it"  (thus  Maurer,  Hitzig.  Kranichfeld, 
Kamphausen,  etc.,  under  comparison  with  chap, 
xii.  8).  Since,  however,  the  obvious  design  is 
to  state  what  Daniel  did  "to  conceal"  the 
vision,  the  signification  of  "not  noticing,  not 
learning"  seems  to  be  the  only  logical  and 
suitable  one  for  Vr'!!'  '^^  in  this  passage ;  cf. 
on  this  interpretation,  vs.  5,  17  ;  Job  xxviii. 
23  ;  Isa.  xxviii.  19,  etc. 

ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES  BELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLOGE- 
TICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETICAL  SUG- 
GESTIONS. 

1.  The  principal  difficulty  to  be  met  with  in 
this  section  relates  to  the  concrete  number  of 
1150  days  or  2300  evening-mornings,  in  v.  14, 
and  in  its  failure  to  agree  with  the  three  and  a 
half  years  of  the  preceding  vision  (chap.  vii. 
2o).  If  simply  the  idea  was  to  be  expressed 
that  the  period  of  tribulation  should  expire  in 
something  kss  than  three  and  a  half  years,  why 
did  the  author  not  permit  the  angel  to  say, 
"  even  before  three  and  a  half  years  shall  have 
passed,"  etc.?  Or  why  did  he  not  select  really 
a  round  number,  as  1200  days  (to  denote  1277, 
which  amount  exactly  to  three  and  a  half  years)? 
Or  why  did  he  not  pursue  the  course  adopted 
by  the  New-Test,  apocalyptist,  who  suijsti- 
tuted  forty-two  months  for  forty-two  and  a 
half,  and  hence  1260  days  for  1277  (see 
Rev.  xi.  2;  xii.  (5;  xiii.  5)? — This  strange 
feature  admits  of  a  correct  explanation,  only 
when  it  is  remembered  that  prophecies  relating 
to  time  are  necessarily  and  unavoidably  of  a 
symbolic-concrete  character,  and  that  for  this 
reason,  no  exact  correspondence,  or  mechanic- 
ally precise  agreement  of  the  prophetic  numbers 
with  the  extent  of  the  periods  in  which  they  are 
realized,  can  be  expected.  Neither  the  seventy 
years  of  being  forgotten  and  of  ruin  which 
Isaiah  predicted  for  the  Tyrians  (chap.  xxv.  15- 
18),  nor  the  seventy  years  of  captivity  in  Baby- 
lon, which  Jeremiah  (chap.  xxv.  11,  et  seq.  ; 
xxix.  10  et  seq. )  foretold  to  the  Israelites  of  his 
time,  were  fulfilled  with  literal  exactness*  (cf. 
infra,  on  chap.  ix. )  ;  and  as  the  ' '  two  days " 
(a^^'i)  during  which  Israel's  state  of  death  or 
the  period  of  its  affliction  was  to  continue,  ac- 
cording to  Hos.  vi.  2,  have  primarily  an  ideal- 
symbolic  value  only,  so  the  "three  days  and 
three  nights,"  which  were  to  be  spent  by  the 
prophet  in  the  belly  of  the  great  fish,  according 
to  Jon.  ii.  1,  were,  in  Uke  manner,  not  an  exact 
number,  amounting  to  precisely  seventy-two 
hours  (cf.  Kleinert  on  that  passage) — and  yet 
both  these  prophetic  numbers  were  designed  to 
foretell  the  resurrection  of  the  Saviour  on  the 
third  daj",  i.e.,  after  two  whole  nights  and  one 

*  (With  rctr-irtl  to  thn  latter  ]>nint  atlcipt  the  nuthor  con- 
cedes tflo  much,  for  the  Bab\ Ionian  csiptivity  was  exactly  eev- 
inty  years  in  length,  namely,  from  the  fourth  yearof  Jehoia- 
kMii.  li.  C.  titMi,  totheeiUccof  Cyrus.  B.C.  53H,  SeeBruwne's 
Orda  StpMartim,  ch,  iii.  sec.  i.  §§  Itil  et  seq.  Had  we  the 
dnta  extant  we  mi^rht  dr)ubtless  prove  the  truth  of  the  other 
periods  named  In  Scripture  prophecy  with  ciuiil  precision.] 


entire  day.*  The  prophets  are  accnstomed  to 
employ  concrete  conceptions  of  time,  and  to 
clothe  them  in  definite  form.  This  form  might 
arise  from  any  incident  or  event,  most  of  which 
can  no  longer  be  discovered ;  but  their  relation 
to  the  duration  of  the  events  which  fulfil  the 
prophecy  must  as  certainly  be  a  merely  approxi- 
mate agreement,  and  not  mathematically  exact, 
as  the  manner  in  which  God  secures  the  fulfil 
ment  of  the  prophecies  uttered  by  holy  men 
through  the  Spirit,  is  in  nowise  a  matter  en- 
trusted to  man,  but  belongs  only  to  the  God  who 
brings  the  predictions  to  pass  (cf.  2  Pet.  i.  20  et 
seq.)f  The  predictions  of  the  prophets  in  the 
Church  during  the  Middle  Ages  and  in  modem 
times  (e.g.,  St.  Hildegard,  Joachim,  the  Parisian 
professor  Nicholas  Oresmius,  who,  in  1364,  fore- 
told the  great  papal  schism,  which  actually 
broke  out  in  1378 ;  Huss  and  Savonarola,  who 
predicted  the  Reformation  ;  the  Lutheran  Mi- 
chael Stiefel  of  Jena  (f  1567)  ;  the  astrologer 
Nostradamus  (fl566);  and  finally  J.  A.  Benzel 
and  Jimg-Stilling)  might  be  substantially  treated 
in  the  same  manner,  so  far  as  they  assume  a  nu- 
merically exact,  ordefinitely  chronologicalform.t 
The  partial  non-agreement  of  their  predictions 
with  the  points  of  time  or  periods  of  the  future 
in  which  they  were  to  be  realized  doe.s  not  de- 
stroy their  character  as  genuine  prophets,  or 
disprove  that  they  were  employed  in  a  superior 
and  heavenly  caUing ;  but  the  approximate 
agreement  or  partial  coincidence  of  their  vatici- 
nations with  the  facts  of  fulfilment  and  their 
chronological  relations,  does  not  warrant  a  sus- 
picion that  they  were  forged  subsequently  to  the 
beginning  of  their  fulfilment,  any  more  than 
the  approximate  agreement  of  either  the  1150 
days  or  the  three  and  a  half  years,  etc.,  in  the 
prophecy  before  us,  with  the  epochs  of  the  Mac- 
cabEeau  history  will  justify  the  pseudo-Daniel 
tendency-hypothesis. 

2.  While  the  slight  difference  between  the 
prophetic  number  and  the  events  connected  with 
its  realization,  discussed  above,  belongs  un- 
doubtedly to  the  category  of  those  "slight  dis- 
crepancies "  which,  according  to  M.  v.  Niebuhr, 


*  [The  *'  three  days  and  three  nights  "  in  question  are  an 
exact  expre.ssion  according  to  Hebrew  usage,  which  includes 
both  extremes  in  all  such  periods.] 

t  Cf.  Tholuck  Die  Prnpheten  und  Hire  Wetftna^ungen  ; 
eine  apologetisch'hermenentiscfie  suulie  (Gotha,  1860).  p. 
11.3  et  seq.,  where  the  remark  is  made  concerning  the  seventy 
years  of  Jeremiah,  considered  as  being  a  designation  of 
time  that  agreed,  generally  at  least,  with  the  duration  of 
the  captivity.  "Can  any  means  of  escaping  this  conclusion 
be  discovered  ?  Only  that  one,  which,  among  others,  E^'ald 
has  not  despised,  viz.,  to  regard  the  number  seventy  as  a 
roimd  number,  and  therefore  =  'along  time.'  ....  Is 
then,  round  number  really  —  long  time  in  the  Oriental  use 
of  language?  The  master  of  Old-Test,  language  will  cer- 
tainly not  attempt  to  deny  that  it  rather  denotes  an  '  ap- 
projcimate  limitation  of  time !'....  Such  numbers 
are  clearly  approximate,  e.g.,  in  Am.  ii.  4,  where  it  is  said, 
*  For  three  transgressions  of  Judah  and  for  four,  I  will  not 
turn  :iway,'  etc  ;  Mic.  v.  5.  '  Then  shall  we  raise  against  him 
seven  shepherds  .and  ei,ght  principal  men  ; '  cf.  Hos.  vi.  'i.  In 
like  manner  a  desolation  of  forty  years  is  predicted  for 
Egypt,  by  Ezekiel,  in  chap.  xxix.  11.  12,  which  is,  indeed,  a 
round  number  of  probable  reckoning,  but  is  at  the  same 
time,  an  approximate  number,  namely,  36  or  .37."  etc.  [But 
these  conventional  numbers  in  a  general  statemmt  are  very 
ilifferent  from  those  obviously  given  as  chronological  data.] 

t  In  relation  to  the  prophets  of  the  Christian  a>ra,  above 
referred  to.  and  also  with  regard  to  several  others,  cf.  the  in- 
teresting statements  in  Splittgerber,  Schlnf  tttitl  Tod.  etc. 
(Halle.  18t)fi),  p.  ii;i5-'J53,  [But  -sound  theologians — indeed, 
accurate  observers  merely — would  certainly  place  all  theea 
pseudo-predictions  on  a  very  different  level  from  those  of  tb« 
prophetfi  of  Scripture.] 


CHAP.   VIII.   1-27. 


185 


' '  must  excite  our  awe,  instead  of  begetting  a 
doubt  of  the  truth  of  the  prophecy,  or  shaking 
our  confidence  in  the  chionology  of  ancient  his- 
tory" {Geschichte  Assurs  tind  Babels,  p.  90),  the 
relation  between  the  character  of  the  history  of 
nations  and  kingdoms  as  described  iu  the  vision 
under  consideration,  and  the  condition  of  Israel 
during  the  ssra  of  oppression  and  revolt  in  the 
Maccabaean  age,  which  corresponds  to  it  as  a 
primary  historical  fulfilment,  is  such,  that  it  un- 
conditionally forbids  the  idea  that  the  vision  is  a 
prophecy  ex  erentu,  and  was  composed  to  favor 
a  tendency.  There  is  no  complete  and  thorough 
correspondence  between  prophecy  and  fulfil- 
ment, that  could  favor  the  suspicion  of  its  com- 
position under  such  circumstances  and  for  such 
a  purpose ;  on  the  contrary,  the  discrepancies 
are  so  numerous,  that  to  trace  historical  facts 
which  shall  correspond  in  every  case  to  the  par- 
ticular features  of  the  prophetic  vision,  involves 
the  greatest  uncertainty  and  difiiculty.  Ber- 
tholdt  and  v.  Lengerke  assume  that  the  chapter 
was  written  shortly  after  the  death  of  Antioch- 
us  Epiphanes ;  Hitzig,  that  it  was  composed 
shortly  before  that  event;  Bleek  {Jahrb.  far 
deuUche  flieologie,  1860,  No.  1,  p.  57),  that  it 
was  framed  at  least  about  that  time.  "  Accord- 
ing to  this,  the  section  was  at  any  rate  composed 
at  a  time  when  the  Jews  had  already  demon- 
strated their  superiority  in  arms  over  the  troops  of 
the  tyrant.  At  the  same  time,  the.se  bloody  feats 
of  arms,  which  formed  the  basis  of  all  the  hopes 
that  animated  the  newly -awakened  national  con- 
sciousness of  the  Jews,  are  not  mentioned  with 
a  single  word.  As  in  chap.  vii.  the  heathen  op- 
pressor triumphs  in  battle  over  the  holy  people 
to  the  end  of  the  three  and  a  half  times,  so  in  this 
selection  the  host  and  sanctuary  are  represented 
as  being  trodden  under  foot  until  the  close  of  the 
period  mentioned  in  v.  14.  Even  the  restoration 
of  the  sanctuary  (v.  14),  which  might  at  least 
indirectly  be  interpreted  as  consequent  on  a 
warlike  triumph  of  the  Jews,  is,  in  v.  25,  re- 
ferred only  to  a  theocratic  judgment  imposed 
directly  by  God,  and  not  to  a  national  victory. 
The  latter,  indeed,  is  directly  excluded.  The 
great  deeds  of  the  oppressor  only  are  spoken  of, 
and  his  overthrow  1^  2??s3  is  immediately  con- 
nected with  them.  Every  real  foundation  for 
the  opinion  that  this  section  originated  at  that 
juncture  which  was  marked  by  the  triumphs 
over  ApoUonius  and  Seron,  over  Gorgias  and 
Lysius,  dearly  bought  as  they  were  with  the 
blood  of  the  people,  is  thus  taken  away,  since 
the  situation  described  iu  the  chapter,  testifies 
only  to  defeat  down  to  the  time  of  restoring  the 
temple,  and  denotes  a  disposition  which  looked 
for  help  only  from  a  supernatural  agency " 
(Kranichfeld,  p.  286  et  seq. ). — Remarkable  as  is 
this  total  silence  respecting  the  national  revolt, 
which  was  so  successfully  introduced,  when  the 
author  is  regarded  as  a  Maccab^an  pseudo- 
Daniel,  it  is  no  less  difficult  to  understand  why, 
if  the  vision  was  recorded  soon  after  the  death 
of  Antiochus,  the  Messianic  hopes  which  must 
have  been  connected  with  that  death,  should 
not  be  mentioned  with  a  single  word.  The  only 
tolerable  explanation  of  this  fact  is  that  the 
death  of  the  oppressor  (his  "  being  broken  with- 
out hand,"  v.  25)  was  future  to  the  writer,  as 
much  so  as  everything  else.     Even  the  restora- 


tion of  the  temple-service,  which  had  been  abol- 
ished, is  clearly  placed  in  the  future  by  the  de- 
scription iu  V.  14,  and  does  not  appear  .is  .on  in- 
cident in  the  past  experience  of  the  prophet. 
The  only  comfort  offered  by  him  in  the  entire 
section  has  no  relation  to  the  sufferings  of  the 
present  or  the  past,  but  to  tribulations  belong 
ing  to  the  far-distant  future. 

3.  The  only  circumstance  which  seems  seri- 
ously to  favor  the  theory  of  a  MaccabiBau  com 
position  is  the  express  mention  of  Jacaii  in  v. 
21,  as  the  world-power  from  which  the  impious 
oppressor  of  Israel  should  come  forth  (preceded, 
however,  by  a  number  of  anti-theistic  kingdoms 
[v.  22]  and  wicked  sovereigns  [v.  23] ).  But  this 
circumstance  also  loses  its  apparent  character, 
as  disproving  Dhe  origin  of  the  chapter  during 
the  captivity,  and  becomes  decidedly  more  in- 
telligible, as  soon  as  we  remember  the  frequent 
contact  of  the  orientals  with  Hellenic  civiliza- 
tion and  culture,  as  well  as  with  Gnecian  mili- 
tary art  and  bravery,  which  began  even  before 
the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (see  Introd.  j  7, 
Note  2).  Let  it  also  be  remembered  that  the 
ancientprophecy  by  Balaam  (Num.  xxiv.  I,  which 
threatened  destruction  to  the  Assyrians  and 
Hebrews  through  "ships  from  Chittim."  i.e., 
through  Greek  iiiiasioiu  from  the  sea  (cf.  supra, 
on  chap,  ii.),  must  have  been  known  to  Daniel, 
even  if  it  had  originated  as  late  as  the  age  of 
Shalmaneser  and  Sennacherib,  and  afterward 
been  incorporated  with  the  early  history  in  the 
Pentateuch.  There  is  no  lack  of  natural  indi- 
cations arising  from  the  events  of  current  his- 
tory, which  might  suggest  to  a  seer  of  the  period 
of  the  exile,  that  precisely  the  distant  nation  of 
the  Greeks  would  become  a  threatening  riral, 
and  eventually,  a  victorious  opponent  of  the 
Persian  power  and  greatness,  and  w'hich  might 
also  awaken  in  him  a  presentiment  of  the  inter- 
nally divided  and  disunited,  and  therefore  tran- 
sient character  of  the  future  empire  of  the 
Greeks.  The  definite  character  of  the  predic- 
tions respecting  the  development  of  that  Javanic 
empire  is  certainly  marvellous  and  inexplicable, 
unless  referred  to  the  Divine  Spirit  of  prophecy  ; 
but  it  is  scarcely  more  wonderful  than  the 
equally  definite  character  of  Balaam's  piophecy, 
which  likewise  related  to  the  Greeks,  or  than 
the  surprising  clearness  and  confidence  with 
which  Amos  foretold  that  the  Israel  of  his  day 
should  "go  into  captivity  beyond  Damascus" 
(chap.  V.  27),  or  Isaiah  was  able  to  predict  that 
the  successors  of  Hezekiah  should  be  led  into 
captivity  at  Babylon  (chap,  xxxix.  6  et  seq.  ;  2 
Kings  XX.  17  et  seq.),  or  Jeremiah  could  de- 
scribe to  his  contemporaries  the  overthrow  of 
Babylon  by  the  Medo-Persians  !  Cf.  also  Kran- 
ichfeld, p.  128  et  seq. 

4.  The  real  and  fundamental  Messianic  fea- 
ture of  this  section,  and,  at  the  same  time,  the 
thought  which  is  pre-eminently  adapted  to  prac- 
tical homiletical  treatment,  is  that  already  no- 
ticed in  the  exegesis  of  vs.  19  and  21.  accordin^^ 
to  which  the  moral  degradation  and  the  wicked- 
ness of  the  world-power  in  its  hostility  to  God 
becomes  more  excessive  with  each  stage  through 
which  that  power  passes  in  its  development,  un- 
til it  reaches  its  climax,  when  God  interferes  to 
judge  and  deliver — thus  bringing  it,  in  its  charac- 
ter as  an  oppressive,  pseudo-prophetic  antichris- 
tiauity,   into  the  strongest  contrast  with  th« 


1S6 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


transparent  light  and  holiness  of  the  Messiah 
and  the  community  of  His  saints,  who  are  bom 
of  God.  This  thought  is  also  presented  by  the 
Saviour  in  the  parable  which  describes  the  tares 
as  growing  together  with  the  good  seed  in  the 
field,  and  as  ripening  for  the  harvest  at  the  judg- 
ment (Matt.  xiii.  80  et  seq. ) ;  it  is  the  same 
Messianic  truth  and  necessity  to  which  he  re- 
fers in  the  former  half  of  his  onttio  eschato'iigica 
in  thoroughly  prophetic  language  (Matt.  xxiv.  5 
et  seq.)  ;  it  is  the  fundamental  thought  of  all 
apocalyptic  prophecy,  of  all  prophecy  relating  to 
the  future  history  of  empires,  as  the  analogous 
sections  in  2  Thess,  and  the  book  of  Revelation 
show  with  sufficient  clearness.  The  goiiU  tri- 
umph over  the  Tuore  harmless  rnim  in  the  last 
times  ;  the  place  of  the  weaker  horns  that  arise 
against  the  Lord  is  supplied  by  others  who  suc- 
ceed each  other  in  constantly  increasing  strength. 
The  "  great  power  "  of  the  enemy  is  reinforced 
by  "great  cunning,"  which  increases  with  the 
lapse  of  time ;  and  his  insolence  is  joined  to 
craft  which  steadily  develops,  and  to  malignant 
dissimulation  (cf.  vs.  28-25),  until,  through  the 
instigation  of  the  great  arch-enemy,  who  is  ever 
the  same,  nation  rises  against  nation,  and  king- 
dom against  kingdom.  To  increase  the  need 
and  oppression  of  the  righteous,  many  false  pro- 
phets arise  and  practice  their  deceitful  arts,  and 
because  iniquity  abounds,  the  love  of  many 
waxes  cold  (Matt.  xxiv.  7  et  seq.,  11  et  seq.). — 
If  all  this,  considered  as  the  real  fundamental 
idea  of  the  visional  representation,  be  duly  re- 
garded, the  jejune  character  of  this  section, 
which  at  first  sight  seems  to  offer  nothing  that 
possesses  practical  value,  or  that  is  available  for 
homiletical  purposes,  will  speedily  disappear ; 
and  as  the  danger  of  feeling  that  only  unimpor- 
tant features,  such  as  the  animal-symbols  (vs.  3- 
7)  or  the  doctrine  of  angels  (vs.  13-18),  are  here 
presented,  becomes  less,  the  preacher  will  find 
the  energetic  warning  and  promise  by  the  Sa- 
viour, "  But  he  that  endureth  to  the  end  shall 
be  saved,"  available  as  an  encouraging  and  hor- 
tatory theme  that  covers  the  ground  of  the 
whole  chapter.  This  forms  the  pregnant  and 
solemn  expression  of  the  New  Testament,  which 
marks  the  consoling  and  elevating  Messianic 
back-ground  in  which  the  discouraging  and 
Rtorray  scene  of  the  chapter  is  laid,  but  which 
here  appears  but  for  a  brief  moment  in  the  con- 
cluding words  of  V.  19,  like  the  cheering  sun  at 
evening  against  the  border  of  the  stormy  cloud. 
5.  Special  homiletical  suggestions  relating  to 
teparate  passages : 


On  V,  3  et  seq.,  Melancthon  :  "  Aliijuoties  di':- 
i  tvm  est,  ad  guid prosit  tenere pritdictiones  deserie 
monarchiarum  et  omnium  teinporum  usque  ad 
extremvm  judicium?  Est  Ecclesice  kac  doctriiia 
et  consoUitione  opus,  ne  inter  tot  afflictiones  el 
scandala  desperet.     Est  etiam  admonitione  optm, 

ut  causas  cngitemus  afflictionum Hit. 

atroces  cmnminationes  exsuscitent  nos,  ut  simus 
diligentioroi  in  consenanda  puritate  doctrinm  it 
in  tita,  ne  Deus  sinat  exi/riri  majores  tenebras.'' 
— The  Tubing.  Bib.  :  "  How  uncertain  is  the 
glory  and  majesty  of  the  kingdoms  of  earth  ! 
Even  when  they  have  attained  the  highest  pros- 
perity they  must  yet  be  humbled,  fall,  and  pass 
away,  like  every  other  earthly  good  and  honor. 
The  kingdom  of  heaven  alone  is  immutable,  and 
forms  the  hope  of  every  believer,"  Psa.  cxlv. 
13. 

On  V.  10  et  seq.,  the  TUb.  Bib.  :  "Nothing  ia 
more  dangerous  than  pride,  which  leads  man 
even  to  war  against  God,  His  Church,  and  the 
true  worship.  This  must  inevitably  be  followed 
by  heavy  judgments  from  God." — Starke  :  "An 
earthly  ruler  will  not  permit  rebellion  against 
his  authority  to  pass  unpunished.  How  shall  he 
escape,  who  revolts  against  the  Prince  over  the 
host  of  God  (Isa.  x.  13)?" 

On  V.  14,  Cramer  :  '"  The  persecution  and  rage 
of  the  godless  is  a  storm  that  sweeps  over  us  • 
God  fixes  its  limits,  results,  and  mea.sure." — 
Starke:  "God  has  indeed  revealed  something 
in  relation  to  the  hope  of  Christ's  Church  for 
better  times  on  the  earth,  in  order  that  no  doubt 
may  be  entertained  concerning  the  fact  itself ; 
but  to  seek  to  ascertain  the  particular  time, 
would  be  fool-hardiness  and  useless  trouble  (Acts 
i.  7.)." 

On  v.  17  et  seq.,  Jerome:  '■'■  Et  EztcMel  et 
Daniel  et  Zacliarias.  quia  so'pe  inter  angelos  esse 
se  cermint,  ne  ileventur  in  superbiam  et  angelicm 
nel  naturce  nel  dignitatis  se  cnecredant,  admonen- 
tur  fragilitatis  sua.  et  jUii  Jtominum  appellnntitr, 
ut  homines  se  esse  noverint." — Geier  :  "  If  the 
presence  of  a  holy  angel  was  so  insupportable  to 
Daniel,  how  terrible  will  be  the  experience  of 
the  wicked  when  they  shall  behold  the  Lord  of 
angels  and  Judge  of  the  whole  world,  Jesus 
Christ  Himself  (Rev.  vi.  15  et  seq.) !  " 

On  V.  24.  Osiander  :  "God  sometimes  permits 
the  plans  of  the  wicked  to  succeed,  in  order  that 
the  saints  may  be  tried." — Starke:  "God  re- 
quires no  great  preparation  or  mighty  instru- 
ments to  cast  down  a  tyrant ;  He  can  adapt  the 
most  insignificant  means  to  that  end  (Acts  xii. 
23)." 


3.   The  vision  of  the  seventy  weeks  of  years. 
Chap.   IX.  1-27. 

1  In  the  iirst  year  of  [to]  Darius,  the.  son  of  Ahasnerus,  of  tJie  seed  of  the  Medes 

2  [Media],  which  [who]  was  made  king  over  the  realm  of  the  Chaldaeans ;  in  the 
nrst  year  of  [toj  liis  reign,  I  Daniel  understood  hy  [tlie]  books  the  number  of 
the  years,  whereoy  [wiiieli]  the  word  of  the  Loid  [Jehovah]  came  [was]  to  Jere- 
miah the  i>ro))het,  that  he  would  a.ccom\)V\iih  [for  fulfilling]  seventy  years  in  [for] 

3  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem.  And  I  set  [gave]  my  face  unto  the  Lord  God,  to 
S(!ek  '  6y  prayer  and  supplic.itious,  with  fasting,  and  sackcloth,  and  ashes. 


CHAP.  IX.   1-27.  1S7 


4  And  I  prayed  '  unto  tlie  Lord  [Jeliovali]  my  God,  and  made  my  confession, 
and  said,'  0  Lord,  the  great  and  dreadful  God,  Iceeping  the  covenant  and  mercy* 

5  to  them  that  love  him,  and  to  tliem  tliat  keep  his  commandments ;  we  have 
sinned,  and  have  committed  iniquity,  and  have  done  wickedly,  and  have  rebel- 
led, even  6;/ [and  there  has  been  aj  departing  from  thy  precepts  [commandments], 

6  and  from  thy  judgments  ;  neitiier  have  we  [and  we  have  not]  hearkened  unto 
thy  servants  the  prophets,  which   [who]  spake   in  thy   name  to  our  kings,  our 

7  princes,  and  our  fathers,  and  to  all  the  people  of  the  land.  0  Lord,  righteous- 
ness helongeth  unto  thee  ;  but  [and]  unto  us  confusion  [shame]  of  faces,*  as  at 
this  day;  to  the  men  [man]  of  Judah,  and  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  and 
unto  all  Israel,  that  are  near,  and  that  are  far  off,  through  [in]  all  the  countries 

f lands]  whitlier  [where]  thou  hast  driven  thsm,  because  of  [in]  their  trespass 
treachery]  that  they  have  trespassed  [done  treacherously]  against  [with]  thee. 

8  0  Lord,  to  us  belonf/eth  confusion  [shame]  of  face  [faces],  to  our  kings,  to  our 
princes,  and  to  our  fathers,  because  we  [or,  we  who]  have  sinned  against  [to] 

9  thee.     To  the  Lord  our  God  belong  mercies  *  and  forgivenesses,*  though  [for]  we 
10  have   rebelled  against 

the  voice  of  the   Lord 


with]  him  ;  neither  have  we  [and  we  have  not]  obeyed 
.Jehovah)    our   God,  to   walk   in   his   laws,   which  he  set 
[gave]  before  us  by  [the  hand  of]  his  servants  the  prophets. 

11  Yea,  [And]  all  Israel  have  transgressed  thy  law,  even  by  [and  there  has  been 
a]  departing,  that  they  might  not  [so  as  not  at  all  to]  obey  thy  voice  ;  therefore 
[and]  the  curse  is  [has]  poured  upon  us,  and  the  oath  that  is  written  in  the  law 

12  of  Moses  the  servant  of  God,  Ijccause  we  have  sinned  against  [to]  him.  And  he 
hath  confirmed  his  words,  which  he  spake  against  us,  and  .against  our  judges 
that  judged  us,  by  bringing  [to  bring]  upon  us  a'  great  evil;  for  [,  which]" 
under  the  wliole  heaven  [heavens]  hath  not  been  done  as  [it]  hath  been  done 

13  upon  [in]  Jerusalem.  As  it  is  written  in  the  law  of  Moses,  [as  ta]  all  this  evil 
[,  it]  is  [has]  come  upon  us;  yet  [and]  made  we  not  our  prayer  before  [we  b;'- 
souglit  not  the  face   of]  the  Lord    [Jehovah]  our  God,  that  we   might  [to]  turn 

i4  from  our  iniquities,  and  understand  [become  wise  in]  thy  trutli.  Iherefore 
[And]  hath  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  watched  upon  tiie  evil,  and  brought  it  upon  us  ; 
for  the  Lord  [.Jehovah]  our  God  is  righteous  in  [u])on]  all  his  works  which  lie 
doeth  [has done]  ;  for  [and]  we  obeyed  not  his  voice. 

15  And  now,  0  Lord  our  God,  that  hast  brought  thy  people  forth  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt  with  a  mighty  hand,  and  hast  gotten  [made  for]  thee  renown  [a  name], 

16  as  at  this  day;  we  have  siimed,  we  have  done  wickedly.  O  Lord,  acconling  to 
[in]  all  thy  righteousness  [righteousnesses],  I  beseech  thee,  let  thine  auger  and 
thy  fury  be  turned  awni/  [return]  from  thy  city  Jerusalem,  thy  holy  mountain 
[the  mountain  of  thy  sanctuary]  ;  because  for  [in]  our  sins,  and  for  [in]  the  ini 
quities  of  our  fathers,  .Jerusalem  and  tiiy  |)eople  arebecoine  [are  for]  a  reproacli  to 

M  all  that  are  about  us.  Now,  therefore  [And  now],  0  our  God,  hear  [hearken  to]  the 
prayer  of  thy  serv.aiit,  and  [to]  his  su|i)ilications,  and  canse  thy  face  to  shine  upon 

18  thy  sanctuary  t/iat  is  desolate,  for  the  Lord's  sake.  0  luy  God,  incline  thine  ear, 
and  hear;  open  thine  eyes,  and  behold  [see]  our  desolations,  and  the  city  which 
is  called  by  the  name  [upon  which  thy  name  has  been  called]:  for  we  do  not 
present'  our  supplications  before  thee  i'or  [upon]  our  righteousness,  but  [for  it 

19  is]  for  [upon]  thy  great  mercies.  O  Lord,  hear;  O  Lord,  forgive;  O  Lord, 
hearken,  and  do ;  defer  not :  for  thine  own  sake,  0  my  God ;  for  thy  city  an<l 
thy  people  are  called  by  thy  name  [thy  name  has  been  called  upon  thy  city  and 
upon  thy  people]. 

20  And  while  I  u-as  [And  I  teas  yet]  speaking,  and  praying,  and  confessing  my 
sin  and  the  sin  of  my  people  Israel,  and  presenting  my  supplication  before  the 
Lord  [Jehovah]  my  God  for  the  holy  mountain  [upon  the  mountain  of  the  sanctuary] 

21  of  my  God  ;  yea,  while  I  loas  [and  I  was  yetj  spe.akingin  pr.ayer,'  even  [and,  t.e., 
then]  the  man  Gabriel,  whom  I  had  seen  in  the  vision  at  [in]  the  beginning, 
being  caused  to  fly  swiftly,  touched  [reached]  me  about  the  time  of  the  evening 

22  obl.ation.     And    he    informed   vie,   and    talked    [spoke]    with    me,   and    said,  0 

23  Daniel,  I  am  [have]  now  come  forth  to  give  thee  skill  and  understanding.  .At 
[In]  the  beginning  of  thy  supplications  the  commandment  [word]  came  [went] 


ISS 


THE  PKOPHET  DANIEL. 


forth,  and  I  am  [have]  come  to  show  thee  ;  for  thou  art  greatly  beloved,'  there- 
fore [and]  understand  [in]  the  matter  [word],  and  consider  [have  understanding 
in]  tlie  vision  [appearance]. 

24  Seventy  weeks  [sevens]  are  determined"  upon  thy  people  and  upon  thy  holy 
city  [<Ac  city  of  thy  sanctuary],  to  finish  the  transgression,  and  to  make  an  end 
of  [seal  up]  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation  for  [cover]  iniquity,  and  to  bring 
in  everlasting  righteousness,  and  to  seal  iq^  the  vision  and  prophecy,  and  to  an- 

25  oint  the  Most  Holy  [holy  of  holies].  Know,  therefore  [And  thou  shalt  know], 
and  understand  [be  wise],  that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  commandment  [word] 
to  restore  [return]  and  to  build  Jerusalem,  unto  the  Messiah  the  Prince,  shall  he 
seven  weeks  [sevens],  and  threescore  and  two  weeks  [sevens]  :  the  street  shall 
be  built  again,  and  the  wall  [trench],  even  [and,  i.e.,  but]  in  troublous  [trouble 

26  of  the]  times.  And  after  [the]  threescore  and  two  weeks  [sevens]  shall  Mes- 
siah be  cut  olf,  but  not  for  himself  [and  there  shall  be  nothing  to  him]  :  and  the 
people  of  </je  prince  that  s/j«Z^  come  shall  destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary; 
and  the  end  thereof  [or,  his  end]  shall  be  with   a  [the]  flood,  and  unto  [till]  the 

27  end  of  the  war  desolations  are  determined  [tJi^re  is  a  decision  of  desolations]. 
And  he  shall  confirm  the  covenant  with  [to]  many /'or  one  week  [seven]:  and 
in  the  midst  [half]  of  the  week  [seven]  he  shall  cause  the  sacrifice  and 
the  oblation  to  cease,  and  for  [upon]  the  overspreading  [wing]  of  abominations 
/te  shall  make  it  desolate  [there  shall  be  a  desolator],  even  [and]  until  the  consum- 
mation, and  that  determined  [decided],  shall  be  poured  [it  shall  pour]  upon  tlie 
desolate. 

GRAMMATICAL  NOTES. 
[X  T3p21»  nsed  absolutely  here,  may  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  loorshipping^  which  it  often  bears,  or  we  may  supply 
'*i7iformation''  from  the  context. — ^  The  form  is  very  intensive,   nb^DrXI.  denoting  extreme  earnestness. — '  Not  only 

is  this  verb,  like  the  others,  emphatic,  but  the  pronoun  added  gives  it  a  reflexive  reference,  like  the  Hithp.  of  the  other 
verbs,  i.q.^for  mytelf. — *  The  art.  prefixed  =  thy,  our,  his,  my,  etc. — ^  The  indef ,  art,  here  injures  the  sense  by  really  mak- 
ing the  noun  definite. — *•  Literally,  let/all,  i.e.,  rest  or  base. — '  Literally,  to  male  thee  tciae  as  to. — ^  Literally,  delights. — 
•  The  verb  being  in  the  singular  indicates  the  unity  or  singleness  of  this  entire  period,] 


EXEGETICAL   REMARKS. 

Verses  1-3.  The  time  of  the  penitential  prayer 
which  led.  to  the  vision,  and  the  occasion  whicli  in- 
spired it.  In  the  first  year  of  Darius,  the  son 
of  Ahasuerus.  Concerning  both  Uarius  the 
Mede  and  his  father  Ahasuerus  (Theodot. ,  Sept. , 
Vulg.,  "  Assuenis")  or  Astyages,  see  thelntrod. 
§  8,  note  4.  The  point  of  time  referred  to  in 
the  text  belongs  to  a  period  later  than  that  of 
the  vision  in  the  preceding  chapter  by  more 
than  twenty  years,  or  about  B,C,  537;*  cf,  on 
chap,  V,  30  and  vi,  1, — Of  the  seed  of  the 
Medes,  The  uationality  of  the  new  nUer  is  no- 
ticed, because  the  subject  of  the  prayer  which 
follows,  and  also  of  the  prophecy  respecting  the 
seventy  weeks  of  years  vouchsafed  in  conse- 
quence, was  conditioned  by  the  circumstance 
that  at  the  time  when  this  incident  transpired 
in  the  experience  of  Daniel,  he  w.n.^i  a  Medo-Per- 
nan  svhject,  and  hence,  liadsecn  tht  second  icorJd- 
power  of  his  former  vision  replace  the  first.  The 
overthrow  of  Babylon  by  the  Median  king  would 
naturally  lead  him  to  meditate  on  the  question 
concerning  the  time  of  the  restoration  of  Jeru- 
salem and  the  realization  of  the  further  theo- 
cratic hopes  comiected  with  that  event.  In  the 
nature  of  the  case,  such  meditations  would  con- 
nect themselves  at  once  with  Jeremiah's  pro- 
phecy relating  to  the  seventy  years  which  were 

•  [This  anachronism  results  merely  from  the  author's  at- 
tempt to  identify  Belshazzar  with  Evil-Merodach,  On  the 
theory  which  we  have  adopted  this  chapter  follows  in  im- 
mediate chronological  order,] 


to  elapse,  before  Jerusalem,  the  desolate,  should 
be  restored  ;  and  such  a  reference  was  unavoid- 
able in  the  case  of  a  vir  desideriorura  (see  v.  23, 
Vulg. ),  like  Daniel,  who  searched  the  Scriptures. 
— Which  was  made  king.  The  passive  "-'?" 
denotes  that  he  did  not  become  king  over  the 
Chaldsean  realm  in  the  ordinary  way  and  by 
right  of  inheritance,  but  that  he  reached  the 
throne  in  an  extraordinary  and  violent  manner, 
through  the  agency  of  the  victorious  Persian 
army  (led  by  his  nephew,  Cyrus),— Verse  2,  I 
Daniel,  understood  (or  "observed")  in  books 
the  number  of  years,  i.e.,  I  gave  attention  to 
that  question,  meditated  upon  it.  With  regard  to 
■'rjij"'2i  a  shortened  HiphU-form  like  1"?.  chap. 
X.  1,  or  like  ri-"'"),  for  rnci~n.  Job,  xxxiii.  13, 
cf.  Ewald,  Lehrh.  §  127  a,  1* — The  construction 
with  an  accusative  is  similar  to  chap,  x,  1  ; 
Prov.  vii,  7;  xxiii.  1.  Von  Lengerke  renden*  it 
incorrectly,  "  I  sought  understanding  in  the 
books,  in  the  number,"  etc.,  as  if  -r^z.~  were 
here  construed  with  3,  as  in  v.  23,  and  this  3 
were  then  dropped  before  the  more  definite 
1Dp^.-|-— The  "books"  (or  "writings,"  ci-ic-) 

*  [It  is  simpler  to  make  it  at  once  an  irregular  Kal-fonn, 
with  Gesenlus,] 
+  [•'  1D0C  (nwrniw)  forms  the  objec.  (o  iri  '"3  (/tm 

derstooa) ;  cf,  Prov,  vii,  7,    Neither  the  placiugof  n^'^£S2 

(6j.  boots')  first,  nor  the  Athnnch  under  this  word,  contro- 
verts this  view ;  for  the  object  is  placed  after  *  by  books 
because  a  further  definition  is  annexed  to  it ;  and  the  sepo* 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27. 


189 


in  which  Daniel  observed  the  number  seventy, 
and  thus  njade  it  the  subject  of  his  meditations, 
were,  according  to  the  context,  those  which 
would  engage  the  attention  of  a  captive,  be  fa- 
miliar and  adapted  to  him.  They  did  not  pro- 
bably include  the  whole  collection  of  O.-T.  writ- 
ings, the  Torah,  Xebiim,  and  Kethubim  (as  v. 
Lengerke,  Hitzig,  Ewald.  and  other  defenders  of 
the  Maccabasan  origin  of  the  book  suppose),  nor 
were  they  lunited  to  the  letter  of  Jeremiah 
(Jer.  xxix.,  although  the  plural  C'lESn  might, 
without  difBculty.  designate  a  single  letter ;  cf. 
Jer.  xxix.  25 ;  2  Kings  xix.  14)  which  contained 
the  prophecy  concerning  the  seventy  years,  but 
they  were  simply  a  collection  of  prophetic  writ- 
ings which  Daniel  had  at  command.  It  cannot 
be  decided  how  great  the  extent  of  this  collec- 
tion was.  Perhaps  it  was  confined  merely  to 
prophecies  by  Jeremiah — possibly  including  only 
those  which  are  now  contained  in  chapters  xxv. 
and  xxix.  (to  which  Wieseler,  Die  70  Woc/ien, 
etc.,  p.  4,  limits  the  D^"lEp,  as  being  the  par- 
ticular rolls  of  writing  in  which  these  oracles  of 
Jeremiah  were  recorded),  or  extending  to  a 
larger  number,  or  even  comprehending  all  that 
are  now  found  in  the  book  of  Jeremiah.  Per- 
haps it  comprehended  a  larger  circle  of  prophetic 
and  other  writings,  similar  to  the  private  collec- 
tion which  Jeremiah  already  must  have  owned 
(cf.  Hengstenberg.  Beitrih/e,  etc.,  p.  33  et  seq.). 
It  is  likely  of  itself  that  the  Pentateuch  was  in- 
cluded among  the  sacred  books  belonging  to 
Daniel,  although  no  positive  evidence  of  that 
fact  can  be  derived  from  vs.  11  and  13  of  this 
chapter ;  for  the  mention  of  the  nnin  in  those 
passages  does  not  prove  that  the  prophet  classed 
them  among  the  C"^"1Cp  which  are  here  referred 
to.* — To  what  passage  in  Jeremiah's  prophecies, 
then,  does  Daniel  allude  ?  Chiefly  and  jjrimar- 
ily,  no  doubt,  to  chap.  xxv. ,  from  which  the  term 
ri-'in,  ''  ruins,"  is  evidently  borrowed  (see  Jer. 
xxv.  9,  11) ;  but  likewise  to  chap,  xxix.,  the  10th 
verse  of  which  clearly  refers  back  to  chap.  xxv. 
11  et  seq.,  and  with  which  our  prophet  was 
doubtless  as  well  acquainted  as  with  the  former. 
— Whereof  the  word  of  the  Lord  cetine  to 
Jeremiah  the  prophet.  "l™8«,  "  whereof,  in  re- 
gard to  which  "  (namely,  years);  cf.  the  use  of 
"CS  in  the  same  sense  in  chap.  viii.  26.  n^'3"l';i 
as  found  also  in  Ezra  i.  1 .  and  in  chapters  xxvii.  - 
xxix.  in  the  book  of  Jeremiah  itself,  is  the  later 
form  of  the  name. — That  he  would  accomplish 
seventy  year  in  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem ; 
or.  ''that  seventy  years  should  be  full  in  the 
ruins,"etc.  ni'in.  '•  ruins,  desolate  condition  ;" 
cf.  Lev.  xxvL  31 ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  10,  33 ;  xxxviii 


ration  of  the  object  from  the  verb  by  the  Athnach  is  just- 
ified by  this  consideration,  th.^t  the  pa.'^sage  contains  two 
statements,  viz..  that  Daniel  studied  the  Scriptures,  and  that 
his  study  was  directed  to  the  number  of  the  years,  etc." — 
Keil  ] 
*[•*  Q'^^CS,",    Ta    ^l^A[a.    is    not    synonymous    with 

n^Z^n  3ri,ac  vpat^at,  but  denotes  only  writings  in  the  plural, 

yet  does  not  say  that  these  writings  already  firmed  a  recog- 
nized collection,  so  that  from  thi.?  expression  nothing  can  be 
concluded  regarding  the  formation  of  the  O.-T.  canon." — 


13,  etc.  Our  prophet,  as  appears  in  v.  2.5  a,  re- 
gards the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, in  the  year  B.C.  587,  as  the  terminus  a 
quo  of  the  seventy  years  of  desolation,  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  Jeremiah  uttered  his  pro- 
phecy relating  to  the  seventy  years  (Jer.  xxvi. 
cf.  xxix.  1  et  seq.)  as  early  as  the  "fourth  year 
of  Jehoiakim,"  i.e.,  B.C.  005,  or  19  years  before 
that  date,  and  accordingly  seemed  to  favor  the 
method  which  reckoned  the  seventy  years  from 
the  first  conquest  of  Judaea  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
and  ended  them  with  Cyrus  (606-536).*  When 
and  how  the  end  of  the  seventy  years  should  be 
realized,  was  therefore  a  question  which  would 
engage  his  special  attention  when  the  Chaldaean 
monarchy  was  supplanted  by  the  Medo- Persian,  f 
— Verse  3.  And  I  set  my  face  unto  the  Lord 
God,  i.e.,  probably,  heavenward  (cf.  Gen.  xxi. 
17;  1  Kings  viii.  22;  John  xvii.  3);  for  the 
turning  of  his  face  toward  Jerusalem  or  the  sito 
of  the  temple  (cf.  vi.  11),  would  certainly  not 
be  disregarded  in  this  instance,  when  about  to 
pray  for  the  restoration  of  the  city  and  temple. 
The  name  "J^S  is  used  here  to  designate  God 
(instead  of  nin"'__  which  is  found  in  several  MSS. ), 
as  in  chap.  i.  2;  Ezra  x.  3;  Neh.  i.  11;  iv.  8, 
and  as  in  several  places  in  the  prayer  itself,  v. 
4  et  seq. — To  seek  by  prayer  and  supplica- 
tions; rather,  "to  seek  prayer,"  etc.  Prayer 
is  conceived  of  as  an  operation  of  the  Divine 
Spirit  (cf.  Zech.  xii.  10 ;  Rom.  viii.  26),  which 
must  be  sought  after  or  elicited  from  within,  by 
means  of  fasting,  putting  on  mourning  gar- 
ments, etc. ;  cf.  2  Sam.  vii.  27  ;  xii.  16  ;  Ezra 
ix.  3 ;  Ecclus.  xxxiv.  21  ;  Luke  ii.  37,  etc.  Upon 
this  subject  see  my  Geschichte  der  Askese,  p.  136 
et  seq.  "^^P  is  "'prayer"  generally  considered 
(Psa.  bcv.  3),  while  Dilirnn.  like  n:nn,  V.  20, 
is  "  prayer  for  mercy,  importimate,  moving 
prayer." 

Verses  4^19.  Daniel's  prayer.  In  order  to 
justly  appreciate  the  impressive  beauty  of  this 
prayer,  and  to  understand  its  plan  and  aim,  cf. 
Ewald,  p.  430  et  seq.  :  "The  motives  that  led 
him  to  pray  are  scarcely  indicated  in  the  intro- 
ductory statements,  vs.  1-3,  and  must  be  dis- 
covered in  the  nature  of  the  circumstances.  He 
had  long  been  deeply  afflicted  because  the  suf- 
ferings of  his  people  were  protracted  during  so 
long  a  period,  and  thus  found  and  meditated  on 
those  passages  from  Jeremiah  in  the  Bible  (?) ; 
but  the  difficulty  of  understanding  the  Divine 
meaning  of  the  number,  redoubled  his  grief. 
He  comprehended,  however,  that  if  the  period 
of  Israel's  punishment  at  the  hand  of  God  was 
so  protracted,  and  the  mystery  relating  to  him- 
self and  the  whole  nation  was  so  hard  to  solve, 
it  must  be  charged  solely  to  the  consequences  of 

•  [The  discrepancy  here  stirmised  by  the  author  is  entirely 
imaginary,  Daniel  reckons  the  captivity  precisely  as  Jere- 
miah, namely  from  the  fourth  of  Jehoiakirn,  B.C.  60(i,  when 
he  was  himself  tJiken  away  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan.  i.  1, 
the  inraMon  having  taken  place  the  preceding  year).  Tho 
present  vision  occurred  B.  C.5.3.S.  when  the  captivity  was 
near  its  close.  ''Jerusalem  did  not  lie  in  ruins  for  seventy 
years  [the  temple,  however,  certainly  did]  ;  the  expression  is 
not  thus  to  be  interpreted,  but  is  chosen  partly  with  regard 
to  the  existing  stste  of  Jerusalem,  and  partly  with  reference 
to  the  words  of  Jerusalem." — Keil.\ 

t  [Keil  combats  at  length  the  notion  of  Bleek  and  Ewald 
that  it  was  Daniel'i^  iinctiUimttj  regarding  the  terminatioc 
of  the  seventy  years  which  moved  him  to  prayer.] 


190 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


the  former  grossly  wayward  course  of  the  peo- 
ple as  a  whole,  and  in  this  concurrence  of  the 
most  incongruous  emotions  he  sought  and  found 
the  proper  plea  to  present  before  Gud.  He  does 
not  plead  for  ability  merely  to  solve  this  numer- 
ical riddle— the  entire  prayer  contains  no  allu- 
eion  to  this ;  and  what,  indeed,  is  a  mere  num- 
ber in  the  sight  of  God  V  The  mystery  of  the 
number  is  oppressive  to  the  heart  of  this  indivi- 
dual supplicant  who  prays  for  light,  and  like- 
wise to  the  whole  nation,  only  because  of  other 
and  entirely  different  errors,  darknesses,  and 
faults :  and  not  until  this  supplicant  has  put 
forth,  all  the  powers  of  his  soul  in  wrestling 
with  God  for  the  removal  of  those  general  sins, 
can  he  hope  that  the  next  uncertainty  which 
bows  him  down  and  troubles  him  shall  be  dis- 
pelled by  a  gracious  ray  from  the  original  source 
of  all  light.  Thus  the  moving  stream  of  this 
deeply  agitated  prayer  gushes  forth  from  a  pro- 
found sense  that  only  when  the  most  ear- 
nest desire  for  renewed  purification,  forgive- 
ness, and  elevation  at  the  hand  of  God  shall 
take  possession  of  the  people  as  a  whole, 
can  Divine  help  be  expected  for  the  desolations 
of  Jerusalem,  for  which  after  all  Daniel  also 
pleads.  His  words,  resulting  from  the  oppres- 
sive darkne.s.s  of  the  present  and  from  a  further 
retrospect  of  all  former  history  relating  to'  this 
state,  thus  become  at  first  the  expression  of  a 
true  confession,  and  then  of  genuine  confidence 
and  supplication.  They  become  a  sincere  con- 
fession in  view  of  the  present,  vs.  4-10,  but  still 
more  so.  vs.  11-14,  in  consequence  of  a  retro- 
spect of  all  fonner  history,  » hich  is  the  more 
proper  in  this  connection,  because  the  blame  for 
this  exceeding  great  destruction  and  disintegra- 
tion dates  back,  in  the  first  instance,  to  the 
older  times  ;  but  in  vs.  15-19  the  trustful  prayer 
and  supplication  for  mercy  become  gradually 
more  fervent  (at  first  in  the  name  of  the  whole 
people.  V.  1.5  et  seq.,  but  ultimately  in  the  name 
of  the  individual  supplicant  himself,  v.  17  et 
seq.),  until  they  cease,  so  to  speak,  in  discon- 
nected sighs,  and  as  it  exhausted  with  the  last 
glow  of  the  fire  (v.  19)." — However  ar.propriate 
we  may  find  this  analysis  to  be  in  general,*  we 
are  nevertheless  obliged  to  enter  a  decided  pro- 
test against  the  presumption  of  a  Jlaccab^an 
composition  of  the  prayer,  which  forms  its  back- 
ground. The  proof  of  this  presumption  is 
found  by  Ewald,  Hitzig,  v.  Lengerke,  etc.,  in 
rhe  similarity  Vietween  this  praj'er  and  the  peni- 
tential prayer  found  in  Ezra  ix.  6  et  seq.  ;  Neh. 
i.  0-11  and  L\.  0  et  seq.,  Bar.  i.  14-ii.  19.  which 
unquestionably  exists,  and  which  they  believe 
indicates  the  imitation  of  those  passages  by  an 
alleged  pseudo-Daniel,  who  lived  at  a  much 
later  time.  The  points  of  contact  referred  to, 
however,  are  in  part  merely  indirect  and  acci- 
dental, such  as  sprang  naturally  from  the  gen- 
eral type  of  thought  produced  by  the  period  of 
the  captivity  and  the  age  immediately  subse- 
quent to  it.  Other  features  belonging  to  them 
in  common  are  more  specific  and  direct ;  but  in 
these  cases  the  prayer  before  us  must  be  re- 
garded as  the  original,  instead  of  the  others  (as, 

*Cf.  the  similar,  but  more  simple  analysis  by  Melancthon 
which  i«  addutvU  bekiw.  in  conm-ction  with  the  hoiiiiletical 
gnggestions.  It  di\  itlen  the  whole  prayer  iii:«f  the  two  partt; 
(1)  of  the  cMnftiilo  (ve.  4-14)  and  [i)  of  the  con-iulatiu  (vs. 
13-19). 


e.g.,  =^-En  nra,  vs.  7, 8,  of.  EzraLx.  7 ;  r-Jn^io, 

V.  9,  cf.  Neh.  ix.  17;  also  the  combination  "cm 
kings,  princes,  fathers,  and  all  the  people  of  the 
land,'  V.  6,  which  is  exactly  repeated  in  Neh. 
ix.  32.  and  again  in  ix.  34,  where  [as  here  in  v. 
8]  "all  the  people  of  the  land  "  is  omitted,  etc.). 
The  more  verbose  and  diffuse  style  of  these 
prayers,  and  especially  of  those  found  in  Nehe- 
miah  and  Baruch,  is  of  itself  sufficient  to  arouse 
the  suspicion  at  a  glance,  that  Daniel's  prayer, 
with  its  comprehensive  brevity  and  freshness, 
must  be  the  original  (cf.  particularly  Z.ndel, 
Kritisehe  Unterss.,  etc.,  p.  191,  whose  e.'^position 
has  not  been  controverted  in  a  single  feature  by 
anything  adduced  by  Ewald,  p.  485).  The  fact, 
moreover,  that  it  represents  the  sufferings  of 
Israel  as  deserved,  but  does  not  allude  with  a  . 
syllable  to  the  damnable  character  of  the  human 
agent  who  executed  the  Divine  punishment,  nor 
yet  to  the  raging  of  Israel's  oppressors,  which 
still  continued,  and  to  the  Divine  judgment 
which  was  certainly  impending  over  them — all 
this  is  surely  not  conformable  to  the  idea  that 
this  section  is  a  compilation  made  in  imitation 
of  older  models  and  dating  as  late  as  the  Mac- 
cabaean  age.  '"  It  is  certainly  conceivable  that 
an  author  writing  in  the  midst  of  the  sufferings 
of  the  Maccabajan  period,  might  occasionally 
avail  himself  of  the  opportunity  to  remind  the 
people  that  their  affliction  was  partly  deserved, 
because  of  their  general  sinful  conduct  toward 
the  God  of  their  fathers,  and  thus  attempt  to 
remove  their  bitterne.ss  of  heart  m  view  of  the 
fact  that  God  had  permitted  such  misery  to 
come  upon  them.  But  it  does  not  seem  natural 
that  he  should  fail  to  strengthen  the  courage  of 
his  nation  by  a  direct  reference,  to  say  nothing 
of  a  passing  allusion,  to  the  excessive  wicked- 
ness of  the  course  of  the  persecuting  despot, 
the  inaiHu:.  at  a  juncture  when  they  took  their 
stand  upon  the  ground  of  that  very  law  of  theii 
fathers  for  which  they  suffered.  Still  more  un- 
natural is  it  that  here,  where  practical  encour- 
agement was  needed  in  a  lime  of  decisive  and 
terrilile  conflicts,  he  should  neglect  this  for  the 
mere  purpose  of  keeping  up  a  conformity  to  the 
prayers  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  which  originated 
in  circumstances  of  a  tutiiUy  lUffrreiit  r/mrricter 
and  involved  a  reference  to  the  enrlier  fact  of 
the  conquest  and  destruction  of  Jerusalem" 
(Kracichfeld).  Cf.  in  addition  the  remarks;  in 
the  Introd.  ^  6,  respecting  the  relation  of  the 
book  of  Daniel  to  the  %vritings  of  the  period 
subsequent  to  the  captivity,  which  refer  to  it ; 
and  also  the  exposition  of  the  several  passages. 

Verses  4-10.  The.  introduclioit.  A  ])eniten- 
tin!  cnnfoision  ■/  da  in  the  name  of  the  people. 
And  I  prayed  ....  made  my  confession, 
and  said,  "'^''rn,  "to  confess,  acknowledge," 
us  in  V.  20  ;  Ezra  x.  1. — O  Lord,  the  great  and 
dreadful  God,  keeping  the  covenant  and 
mercy.  The  same  address  to  the  mighty  and 
terrible  God.  but  who  is  good  .and  merciful  when 
His  conditions  are  met,  occurs  also  in  Xeh.  i.  5  ; 
with  this  difference  only,  that  the  article  is  care- 
lessly omitted  before  "n,  the  second  object  of 
1?3ir,  in  the  latter  passage,  while  in  the  present 
instance  and  in  Neh.  ix.  32  and  Deut.  vii.  9,  it 
is  retained.— Verse  5.  We  have  sinned,  and 
have    ccmmtted     niquity,  arid    have    done 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27. 


19'i 


wickedly,  and  have  rebelled.  Properly,  "and 

sinned  and  rebelled."  for  the  l  in  "uJ"!"")"^  is 
probably  to  be  retained ;  its  omission  from 
several  JISS.  is  explained  from  the  desire  to  as- 
similate this  passage  to  the  parallels  vs.  10  and 
1  Kings  viii.  47.  The  Hiphij  y—::-r„  "  to  sin, 
do  wickedly."  is  used  instead  of  the  more 
usual  Kal  y~-  ;  cf.  xi.  o'3  ;  Neh.  ix.  33  ;  Psa. 
cvl.  G.  —  By  departing  from  thy  precepts  ernd 
from  thy  judgments.  The  infinitive  -m  is 
used  as  a  continuation  of  the  v.  Jiiiit.,  as  in  v. 
11;  cf.  Neh.  ix.  8.  Vi ;  Esth.  iii.  13;  ix.  1,  13, 
IG  ;  vi.  9,  etc. — Verse  G.  The  prophets,  which 
spake  in  thy  name  to  our  kings,  our  princes, 
and  our  fathers,  etc.  The  " '  fathers  "  in  this 
place  and  in  v.  8.  as  well  as  in  Jer.  xliv.  17,  21, 
denote  the  ancestors  of  the  Israel  of  that  day, 
including  all  but  those  who  were  of  royal  and 
princel.v  blood  ;  cf.  the  comprehensive  "  and  to 
all  the  people  of  the  land,"  which  immediately 
follows.  The  same  language  occurs  in  Xeh.  ix. 
32,  where,  however,  the  "  prophets  and  priests" 
are  also  specially  included,  between  the  princes 
and  the  fathers — an  extension  which  clearly  re- 
veals the  thought  of  a  later  age,  and  which  ap- 
pears the  more  superfluous,  inasmuch  as  both  pro- 
phets and  priests  might  unquestionably  be  com- 
prehended in  the  tenn  ■■  fathers  "  (cf.  Judg.  xvii. 
10;  xviii.  19). — Verse  7.  O  Lord,  righteous- 
ness belongeth  unto  thee,  but  unto  us  confu- 
sion of  faces,  i.e.,  the  confusion  which  depicts 
itself  on  the  face  (by  blushing)  because  of  our 
sin  and  the  consequent  disgrace  and  tribulation ; 
cf.  the  familiar  use  of  •,:;-i;,  and  the  passage  ! 
Ezra  ix.  7.  which  paraphrases  the  thought  here 
presented. — As  at  this  day  (so  frcm  time  imme-  j 
morial).  In  ~^n  f.'S'  S  does  not  indicate  the 
indefinite  temporal  sense  of  "about,  at"  (as  v. 
Lengerke,  Hiiveniick,  etc.,  think),  but  that  of 
comparison,  as  always  in  this  form  of  speech  ; 
cf.  v.  15  ;  Neh.  ix.  10;  Jer.  xxv.  18.  etc.  Con- 
sequently the  expression  of  God's  righteousness 
and  the  contrasted  being  put  to  shame  or  dis- 
grace of  Israel  are  both  described  as  having  al- 
ways been  apparent  and  as  being  still  evident.  — 
To  the  men  of  Judah,  and  to  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem.  Vs.  lG-18.  which  represent  Jeru- 
salem as  being  in  ruins,  show  clearly  that  this 
reference  is  not  to  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem 
who  were  contemporarj'  with  the  prophet  iBert- 
holdt,  V.  Lengerke,  Stahelin.  etc.). — Verse  8.  O 
Lord,  to  us  belongeth  confusion  of  face,  etc. 
cf.  Jer.  iii.  2.5  ;  xiv.  20  ;  Neh.  ix.  34,  etc. — Verse 
9.  Though  (rather  "for")  we  have  rebelled 
against  him.  ^;~~'5,  as  in  v.  5.  The  clau.se 
with  ^3  serve«  to  explain  why  the  mercy  and 
forgiveness  of  God  (""in^  ;~  ;  cf.  Neh.  ix.  17,  and 
nn'pp,  Psa.  cxxx.  4)  are  referred  to.  namely,  be- 
cause the  children  of  Israel  need  merc.y,  etc, 
before  all  else,  since  they  are  guilty  of  rebellion 
against  God.  The  thought  is  still  farther  de- 
veloped in  the  following  verse. — Verse  10. 
Neither  (rather  "and  we")  have  we  obeyed 
the  voice  of  the  Lord  our  God,  to  walk  in 
his  laws ;  cf.  Jer.  xliv.  23  ;  1  Kings  viii.  61 ; 
Luke  i.  0  etc.  The  ri~"~  here  mentioned  differ 
from  the  ,— r  of  the  next  verse  merely  in  the 
form  of  the  word,  the  latter  comprehending  the 
DOmmandments.  i.e.,  the  several  manifestations 


of  God's  will  in  a  united  whole.  The  prophet* 
accordingly  appear  as  the  gunrdinna,  teachers, 
and  enforcers  of  the  law  ;  cf.  Isa.  xxi.  11,  whers 
the  term  -  '^~  is  applied  to  them  ;  Jer.  vi. 
17;  Ezek.  xxxiu.  2;  Mic,  vii.  4,  etc.,  which  de- 
signate them  by  C"'ES- 

Verses  11-14.  Continuntinn*  Rtference  to 
the  past  hinttjry  of  the  nation.  Therefore  the 
curse  is  poured  upon  us,  and  the  oath.  As  in 
other  places  the  anger  of  God  (Jer.  xlii.  18  ; 
xliv.  6  ;  2  Chron.  xii.  7  ;  xxxiv.  21,  etc.),  so  here 
the  ciu'se  which  represents  it,  is  characterized 
as,  so  to  speak,  a  fiery  hail  (Gen.  xix.  34  ;  Ex. 
iv.  33  ;  Nah.  i.  (>)  which  is  poured  out  on  the 
sinner.  It  is,  moreover,  not  a  simple  curse,  but 
stands  connected  with  an  oath,  which  supports 
and  strengthens  it ;  cf.  Num.  v.  21;  Neh.  x.30  ; 
Psa.  xcv.  U;  Heb.  iii.  11,  18;  vi.  17.— That  is 
written  in  the  law  of  Moses  the  servant  of 
God.  Lev.  xxvi.  Metseq. ;  Deut.  xxviii.  15  et 
seq.;  xxix.  19.  Concerning  the  designation  as 
the  servant  of  God,  cf.  Ex.  iv.  10;  xiv.  31  ; 
Num.  xi.  11  ;  xii.  7  ;  Josh.  i.  2 ;  Heb.  iii.  5.  See 
also  v.  5,  %vhere  the  same  predicate  is  applied 
to  the  prophets. — Verse  12.  And  he  hath  con- 
firmed his  words,  which  he  spake.  C""!;",  usu- 
ally "  to  raise  up,"  here  sigmfies  "to  preserve 
intact,  to  maintain,  to  confirm  in  act ;  "  cf.  Num. 
XXX.  14,  15.— Instead  of  "'"'"^1  the  Keri  haa 
n^^,  referring  back  to  the  curse,  t.  11 ;  but  all 
the  ancient  versions  and  also  the  parallels  Neh. 
ix.  8;  Bar.  ii.  3  support  the  plural, — Against 
us,  and  against  our  judges ;  literally  "oij/us," 
etc.  ^-"^t'»-',  a  comprehensive  term  denoting 
"our  superiors"  generally;  cf.  Psa.  ii.  10; 
cxlviii.  II,  and  above,  vs,  G  and  8,  the  separa- 
tion of  this  idea  into  "kings  and  princes," — 
By  bringing  upon  us  a  great  evil,  etc.;  rather, 
"  that  he  would  bring  upon  us,"  etc.;  cf.  Lam. 
i.  12:  ii.  17;  Ezek.  v.  9.  etc.— Verse  13.  As  it 
is  written  in  the  law^  of  Moses,  edl  this  evU  ia 
come  upon  us;  rather,  "as  all  this  evil  is  writ- 
ten in  the  law  of  Moses,  that  is  coine,"  etc.f 
rs  before  "■;""-?  serves  to  introduce  the  sub- 
ject, as  in  2  Kings  x.  6 ;  Jer.  xiv.  4  ;  Ezek.  xhv. 
O.J  Concerning  "i''^'?*?  cf.  Isa.  xiv.  24  b. — Yet 
made  Ture  not  our  prayer  before  the  Lord  our 
God;  rather,  "yet  conciliated  we  not  the  face 
of  the  Lord,"  etc., — who  prepares  for  our  just 
punishment.  It  appears  from  the  following 
verse  that  this  neglect  of  propitiating  his  anger, 
hence  an  obstinate  and  hardened  persistence  in 
sin,  was  the  immediate  cause  that  brought  mis- 
fortune to  the  nation.  With  regard  to  '•'■^  '12n» 
E  which  literally  signifies  ' '  to  stroke  one's 
face,  to  smooth  its  stem  fuiTows,"  cf.  Ex.  xxxii. 
11  ;  1  Sam.  xiii.  12  ;  1  Kings  xiii.  G,  etc.— That 
we  might  (or  "  should")  turn  from  our  iniqui- 
ties, and  understand  (or  "  observe  ")  thy  truth. 

*  ["  The  confession  of  sin  disides  itself  into  t\vo  sectionfl. 
Vers.  4-10  stat«  the  transgression  and  the  )^iilt,  while  vera. 
11-14  refer  to  the  punishment  from  God  for  ttiis  guilt.  Ver. 
o  forms  the  introduction." — £"(?/.•] 

t  [.\?ainst  this  construction,  however,  is  the  difference  il 

ger.der  of  ^^P3   and   ,"17"".] 

X  [The  subject,  however,  is  here  rather  "stated  ab-wlut4l$ 
j\s  concerns  all  this  evil,  thufl  it  has  como  upon  ns,"' — Kiiit.\ 


192 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


The  truth  of  God  which  was  not  observed  by 
the  people  is  His  immutability,  by  Tirtue  of 
which  He  actually  permits  the  punishment 
threatened  against  the  sinner  to  be  inflicted — 
hence  His  faithful  adherence  to  His  pledges 
from  a  negative  point  of  view,  which  is  ident- 
ical with  His  punitive  justice  (cf  1  John  i.  9). 
Hitrig's  adoption  of  a  hendiadys,  "that  observ- 
ing thy  faithfulness,  we  should  turn  from  our 
sins."  is  unnecessary. — Verse  14.  Therefore 
hath  the  Lord  watched  upon  the  evil,  i.e., 
'■  He  cared  for  it,  was  concerned  about  it ;  "  cf. 
Jer.  i.  13  ;  xliv.  27.— For  the  Lord  our  God  is 
righteous  in  all  his  vrorks  Tsrhich  he  doeth ; 
literally,  "  o«  the  (/round  of  all  his  works" 
(vbr-^-is-jr);  cf.  Neh.  ix.  33.  nics  -if», 
"  which  he  doeth,"  is  aorist,  like  Jon.  i.  14  (not 
pret.,  "which  he  has  done"). — For  (rather 
"and")  we  obeyed  not  his  voice,  i.e.,  despite 
that  we  obeyed  not ;  cf.  the  similar  expression, 
with  'Pl  sil,  in  V.  13. 

Verses  15-19.  Conclusion.  The  petition  it- 
self in  its  intensity  and  imjxfi'tunity,  ichicJt  in- 
crease from  sentence  to  sentence.  That  hast 
brought  thy  people  forth  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt  with  a  mighty  hand;  a  glorious  and 
striking  proof  of  the  grace  and  mercy  which 
Sod  formerly  manifested  towards  his  people ;  cf . 
Ex.  XX.  2,  etc.;  Psa.  cv.;  cxiv.  etc. — And  hast 
gotten  thee  renown,  as  at  this  day,  i.  e. ,  by  that 
wonderful  act  of  deliverance  hast  acquired  re- 
nown that  continues  to  this  day  ;  cf.  Jer.  xxxii. 
20;  Neh.  i.  10;  ix.  10.— Verse  16.  O  Lord, 
according  to  all  thy  righteousness  ....  let 
thine  anger  .  .  .  be  turned  away,  i.&,  accord- 
ing to  the  displays  of  thy  righteousness.  mplSi 
whether  it  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  plural  of 
rp~:i,  as  a  majority  hold,  or  as  the  plural  of  a 
singular  Pl^,  which  is  Hitzig's  view  (cf.  Isa. 
xli.  10  ;  xlii.  6,  21),  certainly  denotes  "proofs 
of  righteoiisness"  and  not  of  mercy ;  but  it  is 
decidedly  erroneous,  and  involves  a  gross  weak- 
ening of  the  sense  of  the  Scriptures,  to  assign 
the  meaning  "mercy"  to  the  Old-Test  term 
'■  righteou.sness,"  in  a  single  instance.* — From 
thy  city  Jerusalem,  thy  holy  mountain.  The 
opposition  is  the  more  appropriate,  as  in  Daniel's 
time  nothing  remained  of  Jerusalem  but  its  site, 
its  mountain. — Jerusalem  ....  (are  become) 
a  reproach  to  all  that  are  about  us  j  cf.  Psa. 
Ixxix.  4. — Verse  17.  Now  therefore,  O  our 
God,  hear.  PIBSI  is  a  conclusion  from  v.  16 
i,  and  does  not  seiwe  to  resume  v.  15. — The 
prayer  of  thy  servant,  and  his  supplications. 
Daniel  applies  the  designation  'j'^??  to  himself 
in  full  consciousness  of  the  mediatorial  position 
occupied  by  him,  as  by  Moses  and  the  earUer 
prophets  (of.  vs.  11,  5). — Cause  thy  face  to 
shine  upon  thy  sanctuary  that  is  desolate. 
The  ruined  temple  here  takes  the  place  of  the 
lity  and  the  mountain  which  were  mentioned 
Before ,  indicating  that  the  prayer  constantly  in- 
creases in  fervor  and  importunity,  and  addresses 

*  [■'  np"!-   means  the  great  deeds  done  by  the  Lord  for 

his  people,  among  which  the  siprns  and  wonders  aecompany- 
tn'j  rheir  exodne  from  Efiypt  take  the  first  place,  so  far  as 
therein  Jehovah  gave  proof  of  the  righteouBness  of  hU  cov- 
enant promise." — K«tl.\ 


God  with  motives  whose  effective  charactei 
steadily  grows  stronger. — For  the  Lord's  sake, 
i.e..,  for  tliine  own  sake,  for  thy  name's  sake 
(v.  10).  The  noun  is  repeated,  to  the  neglect  of 
the  pronoun,  for  the  sake  of  emphasis,  as  id 
Gen.  xix.  24,  and  as  often  in  the  usage  of  th« 
New  Test.,  e.g.,  Rom.  xv.  5,  0  ;  Eph.  ii.  21,  etc. 
— Verse  18.  O  my  God,  incline  thine  ear, 
and  hear;  open  thine  eyes,  etc.  The  Kethib 
nnjDB  is  to  be  retained,  in  opposition  to  the 
Niphalizing  Keri  npS ;  cf .  v.  19  ;  Psa.  xli.  5  ; 
Isa,  vii.  11;  xxxii.  11. — The  thought  of  the 
phrase  "  incline  thine  ear  "  (cf.  Psa.  Ixxxviii.  3  ; 
Ixxxvi.  1  ;  cii.  3;  cxvi.  2,  etc.),  is  also  frequently 
expressed  in  the  plural,  "  thine  ears,"  e.g.,  Psa. 
cxxx.  2  ;  cf.  Isa.  Ux.  1  ;  Ezek.  viii.  18 ;  Psa. 
xxxiv.  16;  1  Pet.  iii.  12;  Jas.  v.  4.  Luther's 
translation  generally  disregards  this  distinction, 
and  in  almost  every  instance  employs  the  plural, 
even  where  the  original  has  the  singular. — And 
behold  our  desolations  (niaaiD,  as  in  v.  26, 
instead  of  the  former  "  -"^J^,  v.  2 ;  cf.  Isa.  Ixi. 
4)  and  the  city  w^hich  is  called  by  thy  nEune, 
literally,  "  upon  which  thy  name  is  called  ;"  cf. 
Jer.  vii.  10  ;  xxv.  29  ;  xxxiv.  15  ;  Psa.  xlviii. 
3,  9,  etc. — For  w^e  do  not  present  (lit.  "lay 
down  ")  our  supplications  before  thee  for  our 
righteousness.  On  the  expression  nn  J^Bri) 
"  to  lay  down  or  pour  out  supplications  at  one's 
feet,"  cf.  V.  20;  Jer.  xxxviii.  26.  ["The  ex- 
pression is  derived  from  the  custom  of  falling 
down  before  God  in  prayer." — Keil.]  On  the 
thought  cf.  Isa.  Ivii.  12;  Iviii.  2;  Neh.  ix.  19, 
27,  31,  etc.— Verse  19.  O  Lord,  hear ;  O  Lord, 
forgive ;  O  Lord,  hearken,  etc.  The  two-fold 
repetition  of  the  name  Adonai,  "  Lord,"  denotes 
the  highly  importunate  and  almost  uncontrol- 
lable character  which  the  prayer  assumes  at  the 
close;  cf.  Isa.  vi.  o;  Jer.  vii.  4;  xxii.  29. — 
And  do  it,  defer  not.  It  cannot  be  proved  that 
Daniel  intended  to  refer  to  the  long  delay  at- 
tendant on  the  fulfilment  of  Jereminh's  pro- 
phecy of  the  seventy  weeks  by  the  expression 
"defer  not"  (cf.  Psa.  xl.  18;  Ixx.  0),  as  Ewald 
thinks.  The  expression  is  not  suflBciently  defi- 
nite for  this;  and  at  any  rate,  nothing  in  favor 
of  the  Maccabsean  origin  of  this  passage  can  be 
deduced  from  it, — For  thine  own  sake,  O  my 
God  ;  for  thy  city  and  thy  people  are  called 
by  thy  name.  The  explanatory  clause  "for  .  .  . 
are  called  by  thy  name,"  implies  that  '|-.?'2?  is 
equivalent  to  ^?5e;  V.^^  (Isa.  xlviii.  9;  Psa. 
xxiii.  3;  xxv.  11),  and  therefore  signifies,  "for 
the  sake  of  thy  honor,  of  thy  renown "  (cf .  on 
V.  18). 

Verses  20-23,  Arrivnl  of  the  angel  Gabriel, 
who  was  sent  from  God  to  interpret  Jeremiah's 
pro]iheci/  of  the  .terenty  wee/iJi.  And  'while  I 
wras  speaking,  and  praying,  etc.  This  does  not 
mean,  "before  I  ceased  praying"— for  the 
prayer  had  evidently  reached  its  conclusion  with 
V,  19 — but  rather,  "  I  was  concluding  my  re- 
marks, I  was  just  speaking  the  last  words,''  etc, 
Cf,  Isa.  xxviii.  4, — My  supplication  ,  .  .  for 
the  holy  mounlain  of  my  God  ;  properly,  "  on 
the  basis  (or  ground)  of  the  holy  mountain." 
The  preposition  i',  by  virtue  of  its  fundamental 
meaning  "over,"  may  signify  "against"  (v    12) 


CHAP.  IX.  1-37. 


193 


Ba  well  as  '"  for."  According'  to  vs.  IC  and  17 
the  "  holy  mountain"  includes  the  "  holy  city  " 
(Matt.  iv.  5)  and  the  temple. — Verae  21.  Yea 
(lit.,  "and"),  while  I  was  (yet)  speaking  in 
prayer ;  rhetorical  epimakpsis  or  brief  repeti- 
tion, desi^rued  to  favor  the  connection  — Even 
(or  ■'  and  " )  the  man  Gabriel,  vrhom  I  had  seen 
in  the  vision  at  the  beginning  I  or  "  formerly  "j, 
a  reference  to  chap.  viii.  15  et  seq. ,  where  the 
designation  of  the  angel  as  a  "man"  was  ex- 
plained as  being  derived  from  his  human  form. 
Concerning  Hinrz  see  on  chap.  viii.  1, — Being 
caused  to  fly  swiftly;  rather,  "come  to  me 
with  Hying  speed. "  The  expression  ^"?  ^'^^ 
is  difficult.  The  rendering,  "  wearied  with  an 
extended  (,or  rapid)  course,"  which  is  adopted  by 
Ibu  Ezra,  Gesenius,  etc.  (substantially  also  by 
Kranichfeld,  "  very  wearj'")  appears  to  be  sup- 
ported by  the  circumstance  that  the  same  root 
py,  which  always  signifies  '"to  weary,  become 
exhausted,"  lies  at  the  bottom  of  both  words. 
The  sense  of  "being  wearied,"  however,  will 
not  apply  to  angels  generally,  nor  is  it  appropri- 
ate in  the  present  instance,  where  the  "P? 
'rs«2^  of  the  foUowing  verse  clearly  alludes  to 
the  rapidity  of  the  angel's  coming.  This  rapid 
approach  does  not  indicate  that  he  ran  swiftly 
(Havemick,  v.  Lengerke,  etc.),  but  denotes 
hasty  flying,  with  lightning  speed,  as  may  be 
seen  (1)  from  the  root  r;""".  which  is  unquestion- 
ably related  to  qi5,  "to  flj',"  and  therefore 
may  involve  that  idea;  (2)  from  the  testimony 
of  the  ancient  versions,  which  unanimously  ex- 
press the  idea  of  flying  rapidly  (Sept.  Td\ei 
Os,Murvui: ;  Theodotion,  -eroueior  ■  Vulg.,  cito 
•eolans,  and  also  Syrus) ;  (3)  from  the  fact  that 
the  Scriptures  frequently  represent  the  angels 
as  flying -a  trait  which  is  not  confined  to  the 
New  Test.  (Rev.  xiv.  6),  but  is  found  in  the  Old 
Test.  also,  as  Isa.  vi.  2  et  seq.  ;  Judg.  xiii.  20  ; 
Psa.  civ.  4.  etc. ,  demonstrate,  despite  the  asser- 
tion to  the  contrary  of  Hitzig.  Havemick.  and 
others  icf.  al.so  JIatt.  xxviii.  3  etc.).* — About 
the  time  of  the  evening  oblation,  or  about  sun- 
down (Num.  xxviii.  4).  This  theocratic  and 
Levitical  designation  of  time  finds  a  simple  ex- 
planation in  the  prophet's  yearning  recollection 
of  the  sacrifice  that  was  offered  at  that  hour  in 
the  temple-worship,  and  therefore  does  not  in 
any  way  militate  against  the  belief  that  this 
chapter  originated  during  the  captivity.     It  is 

*  [Keil  holds  that  these  terms,  Ciy^S  C]??3,  "  belong 
from  their  position  to  the  relative  clause,  or  specially  to 
■'n'^5<'l   {I  had  fteen),  not  to   "Syi,  since  no  ^ound  can  be 

perceived  for  placing  the  adverbial  idea  before  the  verb." 
This  is  also  countcnnnceii  by  the  Masoretic  intcrpunrtion. 
Keil  accordingly  refers  the  phrase  to  Daniel  himself,  as  being 
utterly  exhausted;  aud  compares  eh.  viii.  1"  et  seq.,  27, 
"  because  Gabriel,  at  his  former  Cijming  to  liim,  not  only 
helped  to  strengthen  him,  bntalso  pave  him  understanding." 
etc.  The  Pi>ithet,  however,  as  applied  to  Daniel,  seems  verr 
Inept  and  vague  here,  especially  following  the  definiLe  phrase 
*' at  first."     Stuart  maintains  that   PT^   essentially  nu'aiis 

"T 

to  hasten,  and  that  it  bears  this  signification  here :  but  the 
Dsage  of  the  word  does  not  sustain  this  souse.  Under  these 
circumstances  we  can  probably  do  no  better  than,  with  our 
author,  to  abide  by  the  interpretation  of  the  old  translators, 
and  regard  both  terms  either  as  directly  from  S^J  or  from 
D^^  a  cognate  of  that  root.] 


no  more  remarkable,  as  uttered  by  the  captive 
Daniel  in  the  reign  of  Darius  Medus,  than  it 
would  be  if  a  Christian  youth  of  the  Middle  Ages 
who  had  fallen  into  the  power  of  the  Saracens, 
should,  after  being  separated  from  scenes  of 
Christian  worship  for  many  years,  still  have 
spoken  of  matins,  or  vespers,  or  the  enmpletorium. 
Cf.  supra,  on  chap.  vi.  11. — Verse  32.  And  he 
informed  me,  or  "gave  me  to  tmderstand." 
Thus  it  is  rendered,  correctly,  by  most  exposi- 
tors ;  cf.  1^3n  in  chap.  viii.  16.  Hitzig's  ver- 
sion, "  and  he  became  aware  " — namely  that  the 
time  of  evening  sacrifice  was  not  yet  past,  aud 
therefore  that  Daniel  had  just  finished  his  even- 
ing prayer — is  entirely  too  forced.  —  I  am  now 
come  iorth,  namely  from  God,  before  whom 
Gabriel  usually  stands  (Luke  i.  19  ;  cf.  also  Job 
i.  12),  That  he  should  noio  come  forth  (nPTi 
like  John  xiv.  11)  denotes  that  Daniel's  importu- 
nate prayer  had  caused  his  being  sent ;  cf.  the 
next  verse. — Verse  33.  At  the  beginning  of 
thy  supplications  the  ccmmandment  (rather, 
"  a  word  ")  came  forth,  i.  e. ,  a  decree  '■"^^'^^  as  in 
Job  iv.  13  ;  Isa.  ix.  7,  etc.)intended  to  comfort 
and  encourage  thee  (aud  consequently  to  answer 
thy  prayer).  It  was  not  "  a  commnndment,"  for 
this  could  only  have  been  laid  on  the  angel,  and 
not  on  Daniel,  who  is  nevertheless  exhorted  '"to 
attend  to  the  word  "  (^^'^3).  Hitzig  renders  it 
correctly,  "a  decree,  an  oracle,  which  is  re- 
corded verbally  in  vs.  24-37." — For  thou  art 
greatly  beloved.  m^'On,  synonymous  with 
mi'^n"™^S,  "man  of  costlinesses,  of  joys," 
i.e.,  well-beloved,  a  favorite  (Luther,  "beloved 
man,  beloved  and  precious;"  Ewald,  "  a  loved 
sweet  one.").  The  "»»'/•  desideriorum "  of 
Jerome  is  misleading ;  for  "il^''3n  certainly 
does  not  relate  to  the  prophet's  anxiety  to  under- 
stand the  mysteries  of  God  {'^  quod  pro  desitlerio 
tuo  Dei  secretu  aiidire  merenrix,  et  esse  cunscius 
futurormn").  With  far  greater  correctness  Je- 
rome himself  compares,  in  remarks  immediately 
preceding,  the  predicate  ~']'!"'~'^,  "the  favorite 
of  God,"  which  was  applied  to  Solomon  (3  Sam. 
xii.  'i~>) ;  and  several  moderns  have  also  adduced 
the  cognomen  of  Titus,  "amor  et  deliciir  yciieris 
liiiiiuiiii,'"  with  equal  ju.stice.*— Therefore  under- 
stand thou  (or  "  observe  ") the  matter  ( "word  " ), 
and  consider  the  vision.  "  The  transition  from 
-p;  to  yizr\  denotes  a  slight  variation  of  mean- 
ing in  the  fundamental  idea.  The  difference  is 
not  greater  than  exists  between  l^'l  itself  and 
ns-;^,  tlie  latter  of  which  =  •^iTn,  '  revela- 
tion,' the  substance  or  soul  of  the  spok<".n  word  " 
(Hitzig).  t 

♦  ["  The  sentence,  'for  thou  art  a  ni.in  c^reatly  beloved,* 
docs  not  contain  the  rtason  for  Gabriel's  coinin;^  in  haste, 
but  for  the  principal  thought  of  the  verse,  the  going  forth, 
of  the  word  of  God  imme.iiately  at  the  beginning  of  Daniel's 
l)rayer." — A'eiV]. 

+  L**~i5"l?2n  stands  not  for  revelation,  but  is  the  rwio#% 
the  appearancti  of  the  angul  by  whom  the  word  of  God  w.ia 
communicated  to  the  prophet.     rii<"l'*3    is  acconlingly  not 

the  contents  of  the  word  Hpoken,  but  the  form  of  its  coni- 
mnnication  to  Daniel.  To  both— the  word  and  the  form  of 
its  revelation — Daniel  must  g.ve  heed.  This  revela:ion  was^ 
moreover,  not  comuiunicated  to  him  in  a  vision,  hut  while 
In  hifl  natural  cousciousaeas.** — KeU.^ 


]9i 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Verses24-27.   The  interpretat' on  of  the  seventy 
weeks  of   yeari>.     Seventy   weeks   are   deter- 
mined. Literally,  are  "  cut  off  ;  "  for  this  is  the 
proper  meaning  of  ~rin:,  in  like  manner  as  V'tU 
primarily   signifies    "to   cut,    to   sharpen   to   a 
point,"  and  then  "  to  conclude,  determine  ;  "  cf. 
Job  xir.  5  ;  Isa.  x   22 ;  1  Kings  xx.  40.     The 
Vulgate,  influenced  by  t ra/io/JcjiSz/ffni',  Matt.  xxiv. 
32,  has  "  abbreriatf.  Kiirit,'"  which  conflicts  with 
the  context.     Hitzig,  on  the  contrary,  is  correct 
when  he  rejects   the  idea   of  "dividing"  into 
two  sections,  which  might  seem  to  accord  with 
V.  2.0  et  seq. .  and  instead  applies  the  cutting  off 
to  the  "sum  of  the  time"  as  a  whole,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  he  paraphrases,  "  a  section  of 
time  (consisting)  of  seventy  years  is  appmnted." 
-The  construction  is  the  familiar  one  of  the  im- 
personal  passive   with  an  accusative  (cf.   Gen. 
XXXV.   20 ;  Ex.   xiii.  7 ;   Isa.   xxi.  3 ;  also  supra, 
on  V.    13).     Entire!}'  too   artificial  is  the  view 
which  Wieseler  adopts,  that-  "^T  in  v.  33  is  the 
subject,  while  the  seventy  weeks  form  the  pre- 
dicate— "  the  word  is  cut  off  at  seventy  weeks." 
This  view  is  opposed  further,  by  the  fact  that 
^rn;   cannot  in  this  place  denote  the  idea  of 
"  being  abbreviated. "—-■'J'Sr  3"?:'f ,  "seventy 
weeks."     This  cannot  possibly  denote  seventy 
sveeks  in  the  ordinary  sense,  or  400  days;  for 
the  number  has  an  obvious  relation  to  the  sev- 
enty years  of  Jeremiah,  v.  2,  and  the  brief  limit 
of  400  days  is  not  suited  to  serve  as  a  mystical 
paraphrase  of  the   period  of  three  and  a  half 
years.     Moreover,  according  to  the  descriptions 
in  chapters  vii.   and  viii.,  the  three  and  a  half 
years  were   throughout   a   period   of   suffering 
and  oppression,  while  in  v.   25  et  seq.  the  lat- 
ter and  more  extended  subdivision  (amoimting 
to   sixty-two  weeks)    of   the   seventy  weeks  is 
characterized  as  being  comparatively  free  from 
sufferings.     Finally,  the  three  and  a  half  years 
evidently  reappear   in   v.    27,   m   the    form    of 
the   •'  half -week "   during  which  the   sacrifices 
and   oblations   were   to   cease,    etc.  ;    and   this 
undeniable   identity   of    the   small   fraction  at 
the  end  of  the  seventy  weeks  with  ,the  three 
and   a   half    years    of    tribulation,    heretofore 
described,    removes    it    beyond    the    reach    of 
doubt  that   the    seventy   weeks   are   to   be  re- 
garded  as  sme.nty  weeks  of  years,  and  there- 
fore  as  an  amplification  of  the  seventy  years 
of  Jeremiah.      Such    a   prophetic   or   mystical 
transformation   of    the    seventy   years   into   as 
many  periods  of  seven  years  each  is  not  unpar- 
alleled in  the  usage  of  the  ancients;    cf.,  e.g., 
the   remarks  of  Mark  Varro,   in   Aul.    Gellius, 
iV.  A.  III.,  10:  ''Sejnm  nndecimain  annoriim 
hebdomadi-m  ingressum  esse  et  ad  evm  diem  septit- 
a(/inta  hedfimadds  librorum  conscripsisse  ;  "  also 
Aristotle,  PoKt.,  VII.  16  ;  Censorin.,  dedie  naUdi, 
C.    14.     It  was,  however,  peculiarly  adapted  to 
the  prophet's  purpose,  and  was  especially  intel- 
ligible to  his  readers,  inasmuch   as  the  Mosaic 
law  (Lev.   xxv.  2,  4  et  seq.;  xxvi.   34,  S.l.  43; 
cf.   3  Chron.   xxxvi.   31)  had  design.ated  every 
seventh  year  as  a  sabbath  of  the  land,  and  had 
introduced   the  custom   of   dividing   the   years 
into  hebdomads,  which  thus  became  familiar  to 
every  individual  io  the  Jewish  nation  during  all 
subsequent  ageis.     The  thought  that  instead  of 
•evenly    years    seven    times   seventy  were   to 


elapse  before  the  theocracy  should  be  restored 
in  all  its  power  and  significance,  and  that,  con- 
sequently, an  extended  period   of  delay  should 
precede  the  advent  of  the  Messianic  sera,  is  "  an 
integral   feature   in   the    mode    of    conception 
which  prevaOs  throughout  the  book  "  (Kranich- 
feld).     It  should  also  be  observed  that  the  idea 
weeks,  as  the  principal  idea,  is  placed  before  thq 
numeric^d  idea  for  emphasis  :   "  weeks  (of  years, 
not  simple  years),  seventy  in  number,  are  deter- 
mined," etc.     The  masculine  form  of  the  noun 
occurs  also  in  chap.   x.   2,  3  ;  cf.  Gen.   xxix.  27 
et  seq.;  Lev.    xii.   5.* — Upon  thy  people  and 
upon  thy  holy  city.      "Thy"  is  used  in  the 
sense   of  ''near  thy  heart,  dear   and  precious 
unto  thee;"   cf.    v.   30;   chap,   xii    1.     As  the 
people  of  Jehovah  (v.  10)  is  also  Daniel's  peo- 
ple (v.  30),  so  is  Jerusalem  ?iis  city,  his  favorite 
city.     It  may  have  been,  in  addition,  his  native 
place  ;  but  this  circumstance  cannot  be  deter- 
mined from  this  passage ;   see  the  Introd.  §  3, 
at  the  beginning.     The  predicate  "  holy  "  was 
deserved  by  Jerusalem,  even  when  in  ruins,  and 
without  regard  to  the  length  of  the  period  dur- 
ing which  it  was  desolate,  since  by  virtue  of  all 
its  history  in  the  past,  and  in  view  of  its  impor- 
tance for  God's  kingdom  in  the   future,  it  was 
absolutely  "  the  holy  city,"  cf.   vs.   lU-20;  Isa. 
lii.    1 ;  Matt.   iv.  5. — To  finish  the  transgres- 
sion and  to  make  an  end  of  sins.     The  infini- 
tives with  '?  which  follow,  to  the   end  of  the 
verse,    "direct  attention,  with  a  view  to  com- 
fort, to  the  blessed  experiences  connected  with 
the  close  of  the  period  in  which  the  people  and 
the  city  were  then  languishing."  thus  denoting 
from   the  outset   that  the  Vision  is  concerned 
with  the  realization  of  the  Messianic  hopes  of 
Israel,  in  the  time  when  "  Zion's  warfare  "  shall 
be  accomplished  (Isa.   xl.   2  et  seq.)— in  short, 
that  the  prophetic  remarks  of  the  angel  acquire 
a  Messianic  character  from  this  point. — Theo- 
dot.,  Hengstenb..  v.   Leng.,  Wiesel.,  Kninichf., 
etc.,  punctuate  the  Kethib    J'^Bn  sbsi,   and 
read  "  to  seal  np  the  transgression."  which,  ac- 
cording to  V.  Lengerke,  signifies  "  to  forrjicc  the 
transgression,"  and  according   to  Kranichfeld, 
means  "to   hinder  or  restrain  the  sin."     The 
former  rendering,  however,   would  lead  to  an 
unsuitable  tautology  with  V'  lESb  ;   and  the 
idea  of  '■restraining  {coiiibere)  sin"  would  be 
more  properly  expressed  by  i^^ ;   cf.   Job  xiv. 
17;  Hos.   xiii.    2.     The  idea  of  "restraining," 
moreover,   has  not  been  presented  by  a  single 
one  of  the  more  ancient  translators,  not  even 
by  Theodotion.     It  is  better,  therefore,  to  read 
xijb  with  a  majority  of  modems,  and  to  re- 
gard this  as  standing  for  nbwi,  expressive  of  the 
idea  of  completing  or  filling  up.      This  view  is 
also   supported   by   the   parallel    C.7n,1,    as  it 
should   be    read,    with   the    Keri   and    all   the 
ancient  versions,  excepting  that  of  Theodotion; 
cf .   chap.   viii.    23  ;  Isa.  xvi.   4  ;  xxxiii.    1 ,  etc. 

*  [Keil  mnintninR  that  neither  the  gender  nor  position  of 
C^y-t)  is  here  significant :  but  it  is  certain  that  the  masc. 
plnr.  nowhere  else  occurs,  except  at  chap.  x.  2,  3.  where  it 
is  .iefined  by  the  ndtlition  of  C'Ja"^.  rfn.V".  E\en  Stuart, 
who  dues  not  apply  this  prophecy  to  the  Messianic  age.  can- 
didly admits  that  /teptades  of  years  can  only  be  designated 
by  this  expression.! 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27. 


I'Jo 


The  "  making-  full  of  sin,"  i'.S. ,  of  the  measure 
of  sin,  is  substantially  identical  with  the  finish- 
ing of  the  transgression,  from  which  it  differs 
only  in  expressing  the  idea  more  forcibly.  The 
Kethib  -Fn^l  (similarly  Theodotion  also: 
riw  a(j>payiaai  dfiap-iai;)  is  decisively  rejected 
by  the  single  fact  that  cnik^i^  "  and  to  seal 
up,"  is  repeated  in  this  passage,  and  in  a  sense 
that  differs  materially  from  what  it  would  beiir 
in  the  former  half  of  the  verse.  It  is  certainly 
possible  to  refer  (with  Kranichfeld)  to  chap,  vi, 
18;  xii.  4;  Deut.  xx.xii.  84:  Job  ix.  7;  xxxvii. 
7,  in  support  of  this  rendering,  which  would 
perhaps  add  to  S<-r?,  "to  seal  up,  to  hinder," 
the  idea  of  a  still  more  effective  sealing  up  or 
of  a  more  complete  banishment.  The  sense  of 
"  filling  up,"  however,  which  is  secured  by  chap, 
viii.  23,  and  by  which  the  language  of  the  whole 
verse  gains  a  harmonious  variety  and  multifor- 
mity, is  far  more  likely  to  prove  correct ;  and,  in 
addition,  the  .substitution  of  DrnbT  for  rrnbl  in 
the  preceding  line  would,  in  and  of  itself,  be  an 
exceedingly  probable  error  on  the  part  of  a 
copyist,  which  might  be  easily  comprehended. — 
To  make  reconciliation  (rather  "expiation") 
for  iniquity,  and  to  bring  in  everlasting  right- 
eousness. These  closely  united  memljers  stand 
related  to  each  other  as  antecedent  and  conclu- 
sion, or  as  a  negative  and  a  positive  statement 
of  the  same  fact.  They  form  the  central  point 
of  the  acts  of  gracious  blessing  wTought  by  God. 
and  both  are  introduced  nlike  by  the  two  infini- 
tive clauses  which  precede,  and  appear  to  be 
conjoined  and  brought  to  a  common  conclusion 
by  those  which  follow.  According  to  this, 
tliree  pairs  of  actions,  or  three  double  numbers, 
were  designed  in  this  verse,  as  Gesenius,  Mau- 
rer,  and  Hitzig  correctly  observe ;  and  for  this 
reason  the  disjunctive  accent  i-  seems  less  suit- 
able after  '15  than  it  would  have  been  after 
nKHn.  The  intimate  collocation  of  V"  1E2 
with  "  PI'-?  S*^-"  is  warranted,  further,  by 
the  fact  that,  without  doubt,  God  is  regarded 
as  the  efficient  cause  of  both  these  results,  and 
particularly  of  the  "expiation"  (literally  "cov- 
ering over ")  of  sin ;  cf.  Psa.  xxxii.  2 ;  Ixv.  4, 
etc. — Righteousness,  which  is  a  characteristic 
of  the  Messianic  period  in  other  prophecies  also 
(cf.  Isa.  liii.  11  ;  Jer.  xxxiii.  15  et  seq.;  Mai. 
iii.  20),  is  here  described  as  "  everlasting,"  in 
harmony  with  the  eternal  character  of  Messiah's 
kingdom  ^cf.  chap.  ii.  44;  vii.  18.  27;  Isa.  li. 
5-8).  It  is  of  course  not  to  be  limited  to  the 
sphere  of  a  merely  extenial  ( Levitical  and  theo- 
cratic) righteousness,  as  even  Hitzig  acknowl- 
edges, when  he  observes  that  external  righteous- 
ness cannot  be  regarded  as  separate  from  in- 
ternal in  any  case.  — And  to  seal  up  vision  and 
prophet  (marg.),  and  to  anoint  the  most  holy 
(rather,  "a  holy  of  holies").  The  relation  be- 
iweea  these  final  members  of  the  whole  series 
of  Messianic  results  to  be  secured  is  that  of 
the  internal  to  the  external,  of  the  ethical  to 
the  ritual,  or  of  religion  to  worship.  Kranich- 
fcld's  remark  is  incorrect,  when  he  observes  that 
the  third  pair  in  the  gracious  series  occupies  an 
inverse  relation  to  the  first,  in  view  of  its  form, 
inasmuch  as  the  latter  proceeds  from  the  ante- 


cedent to  the  consequent,  while  that  method  is 
here  reversed  (namely,  the  sealing  of  prophecy 
precedes  the  anointing  of  the  most  Holyi."  But 
Hitzig,  Bleek,  etc.,  are  no  less  at  fault,  when 
they  assume  that  the  anointing  of  the  most 
Holy  is  mentioned  after  the  sealing  of  prophecy, 
and  at  the  end  of  the  entire  series,  because  it 
liad  not  been  foretuld  by  Jeremiah,  while  the 
other  features  had,  directly  or  indirectly,  formed 
the  subject  of  the  Messianic  promises  with  that 
prophet.  The  opinion  that  the  "  sealing  of  vi- 
sion and  prophet "  denotes  specifically  the  con- 
firmation of  Jeremiah's  prophecy  respecting  the 
seventy  years  (as  v.  Lengerke,  Wieseler,  Kamp- 
hausen,  etc.,  also  hold)  in  chap.  xxv.  and  xxix. 
is  wholly  untenable,  since  the  terms  II'H  and 
»^?:,  without  the  article,  evidently  do  not  refei 
to  any  particular  prophet  or  prophecy,  but 
rather  to  the  prophetic  institution  and  its  visions 
relating  to  the  prospective  salvation  in  general. 
The  idea  is,  that  everything  in  the  form  of  pro- 
phetic visions  and  predictions  which  had  been 
produced  in  the  course  of  theocratic  develop- 
ment from  the  time  of  Moses  (S"'::  and  "("'n 
are  collective  and  general;  cf.  chap.  xi.  I'll 
should  receive  "  sealing,"  i.e..  Divine  confirma- 
tion and  recognition,  in  the  form  of  actual  ful- 
filment (cf,  1  Kings  xxi.  8;  Esth.  viii.  8).j 
Jeremiah's  prophecy  cannot  be  intended,  eithei 
exclusively,  or  even  by  way  of  pre-eminence  (as 
Ewald  thinks),  because  it  does  not  mention  the 
expiation  of  s  n  and  the  establishing  of  everlast- 
ing .Messianic  righteousness,  which  nevertheless 
are  here  particularly  emphasized.  The  sense  is 
clearly  general,  similar  to  that  found  in  New- 
Test,  passages  like  Acts  iii.  19  ;  x.  4:^  ;  2  Cor.  i. 
20,  etc. — The  prospect  of  an  "anointing  of  the 
most  Holy,"  which  is  presented  at  the  close,  or 

*  ["The  Bix  statements  (represented  by  the  intinitives 
with  *)  are  divided  by  Maurer.  Hitzig.  Ivranichfeld.  and 
others:,  into  three  pas-sages  of  two  members  e;ich,  thu.« : 
After  the  e.vpiratioii  of  seventy  weeks  theie  ?hall  ( 1 )  be  com- 
pleted the  measure  of  sin  :  (2j  the  sin  shall  be  covered  and 
righteousness  brought  in  :  (y)  the  prophecy  shall  be  fulfilled, 
and  the  temple,  which  was  desecrated  by  Ajitiochus,  shall 
again  be  consecrated.  The  Maaoretos,  however,  seem  to  have 
already  conceived  of  this  threefold  division  by  placing  the 
Athnaeh  under  D'^cbi'   pTIfc  (the  fourth  clause) ;  but  it 

resta  on  a  false  construction  of  the  individual  members, 
especially  of  the  first  two  passages.  R.ither  we  have  two 
three-membered  sentences  before  us.  This  appears  evident 
from  the  arrangement  of  the  six  statements.  I.e..  that  the 
first  three  statements  treat  of  the  taking  aw(  y  of  sin,  and 
thus  of  the  bringing  in  of  everlasting  righteou.' ness,  with  its 
consequences,  and  thus  of  the  positive  deliverance,  and  in 
such  a  maimer  that  in  both  clas.ses  the  three  members  stand 
in  reciprocal  relation  to  each  other :  the  fourth  statement 
corresponds  to  the  first,  the  fifth  to  the  second,  the  sLxth  to 
the  third — the  second  and  the  fifth  present  even  the  same  verb 
2r^n." — Keil.  It  is  not  necessary,  however,  to  assume  that 
these  results  were  all  to  await  the  expiration  of  this  entire 
period  :  they  were  only  to  be  in  the  process  of  taking  place 
during  or  after  it  :  iu  a  word,  this  was  to  be  the  final  period 
of  the  Jewish  economy,  in  or  at  the  e'nd  of  u  hich  all  these 
consimimations  were  to  take  place.] 

t  ["  But  for  this  figurative  use  of  the  word  '  to  seal '  no 
proof-pas-^ges  are  adducted  from  the  O.  T.  .\dti  to  this 
that  the  word  cannot  be  used  here  in  a  ditTerent  sense  from 
that  in  which  it  is  used  in  the  second  passage.  The  sealing 
of  the  prophecy  corresponds  to  the  sealing  of  the  transgres- 
sion, and  must  be  similarly  understood.  The  prophecy  ia 
sealed  when  it  is  laid  under  a  seiU.  so  thnt  it  can  no  longer 
actively  show  itself '"  {Keil) :  and  corresixintlingly  transgres- 
sion is  sealed,  when  its  further  demonstration  is  prevented 
In  short,  both  are  to  be  suppressed  after  that  dale ;  trana- 
prcssion  by  the  Atoning  Sacrifice^  and  pro;ihecy  by  the  cloM 
of  the  O.-T.  canon.] 


196 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


rather,  "  unto  an  anointed  one,  a  prince,"  etc. 
The   expression  "1^1  Stsn  corresponds  to  S^'J 
13"T  at  the  beginning  of  the  angel's  remarks, 
and  therefore  probably  denotes   the  promulga- 
tion of  a  Divine  decree  rather  than  of  a  royal 
edict  (as  Dereser,   Hiivemick.  Weigl,  etc.,  con- 
ceive with  refere.nce  to  the  edict  of  Artaxerxep 
Longinianus,  ivlich   commanded    that   the   re- 
building of  Jerusalem  should  be  commenced). 
The  latter  idea  would  require  that  '^^'^  should 
be  connected  with   -;-;,   in   order  to  its  clear 
expression ;    and  the  observation   of    Hitzig  is 
probably  correct :   "Gabriel  could  not  speak  so 
objectively,  and  with  composure,  of  the  decree 
of  a  heathen  king  that  would  imply  his  right  to 
dispose  of  the  holy  city  ;  such  a  decree  would 
no  more  be  a  I^T  in  the  mind  of  a  theocrat 
than  the  confederacy  in  Isa.  viii.  12  would  be  a 
^"fp-" — Moreover,  ^^-j  cannot  denote  a  decree 
at  all,   but   rather   a  prophetic   statement,   an 
oracle,    which    in   this    instance    promises   the 
restoration  of  Jerusalem.     This  Divine  predic- 
tion concerning  the  rebuilding  of  the  holy  city 
cannot  differ  materially  from  the  repeated  pro- 
phecy  by   Jeremiah    (chap.    xxv.    and    xxix.), 
which  foretold  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem  dur- 
ing seventy  years,  and  the  subsequent  restora- 
tion of  the  exiles  and  punishment  of  their  Chal- 
dsean  oppressors.     Although  the  restoration  of 
the  theocracy,  and  especially  the  rebuilding  of 
Jerusalem,  are  not  expressly  mentioned  in  the 
latter  prophecies,  these  features  are  yet  impli- 
citly included  in  the  prediction,  chap.  xxv.  12  et 
seq.,  concerning  the  judicial  visitation  of  the 
Chaldaeans  and  the  re-adoption  of  Israel ;  and 
in  chap.  xxix.  10  the  gracious  visitation  of  the 
Jews  is  described  dii-ectly  as  a  restoration  to 
their  place,  i.e.,  their  country.     It  is  not  neces- 
sary, therefore,  to  seek  for  a  prophecy  by  Jere- 
miah that  predicts  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem 
in  more  literal  and  explicit  terms.     If  such  a 
passage   be  found  in  Jer.  xxx.   18,  or  xxxi.  38 
(Hitzig,  Ewald,  Bleek,  Kamphausen,  etc.),  it  is 
nevertheless  unnecessary  to  assume  that  Daniel 
here  refers  only   to  that  prophecy  (which  was 
probably   composed   after    the    destruction   of 
Jerusalem    by   Nebuchadnezzar,   B.C.  588,  ac- 
cording to  chap.  xxxi.  0  et  seq.).     It  is  more 
probable  that  our  prophet  made  no  chronologi- 
cal distinction  between  Jer.  xxix.  (a  letter  com- 
posed about  B.C.  598)  and  the  more  extended 
prophecy  in  chap.   xxx.  and  xxxi.     They  (and 
also  chap.  xxv. )  were  probably  regarded  by  him 
as   belonging,   upon  the   whole,   to   the   same 
period  and  the  same  circle  of  prophecies,  name- 
ly, that  of  the   overthrow  of  the  kingdom   of 
Judah  which  covered  eighteen  to  twenty  years, 
beginning  with  the  first  conquest  of  Jerusalem 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoi- 
akim,  or  B.C.  (!05,  and  ending  with  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  city  in  B.C.  588.     His  starting-point 
for  the  calculation  of  the  seventy  years  thus 
naturally    became    uncertain    and    vacillating, 
and  for  that  very  reason  became  the  inciting 
cause  of  the  prophecy  under  consideration.    See 
supra,    on  v.  2.* — It  would  conflict  with  the 

*  [Few  will  be  disposc<l  to  ndopt  njl  interpretation  that 
conies  to  so  vai^ie  a  conclusion,  when  the  very  object 
of  these  added  verses  is  evidently  ti  furnish  a  deftnitc 


rather  of  a  most  Holy  (  p  '•^"IP,  without  the 
article)  is  evidently  a  solemn  act  of  worship, 
which  is  substantially  equivalent  to  the  restora- 
tion of  the  theocratic  worship  as  a  whole.  It 
is  the  anointing  with  oil  or  theocr.itic  consecra- 
tion of  the  mcrificiid  nltnr  of  the  New  Covenant, 
of  the  IMessianic  community  of  the  redeemed, 
the  pure  sanctuarj',  which  shall  no  more  be  pro- 
faned, that,  according  to  chap.  viii.  14  (cf.  vii. 
25  ;  ix.  17),  shall  take  the  place  of  the  desecrated 
aud  defiled  altar  of  the  Old  Dispensation.  From 
Lev.  viii.  11,  comp.  with  Ezek.  xliii.  20,  2(5, 
where  a  consecration  of  the  altar  of  burnt-of- 
ferings by  means  of  an  act  of  anointing  is  de- 
scribed (in  Lev..  1.  c,  with  oil,  in  Ezek.,  1.  c, 
with  the  blood  of  the  sacrifice),  and  also  from 
Ex.  xxix.  37 ;  xxx.  29  ;  xl.  10,  where  the  sacri- 
ficial altar  is  expressly  designated  as  the  —  ~p 
^"r  7P.  it  is  evident  that  the  altar  of  sacrifice  is 
here  intended,  instead  of  the  holy  of  holies  in 
the  temple  at  large,  or  even  the  Messiah  himself 
{sinictus  sanctorum),  as  Syrus,  the  Vulgate,  and 
others  suppose. — The  prophecy  under  considera- 
tion has  been  twice  fulfilled, — at  first  externally 
and  in  a  literal  sense,  by  the  actual  restoration 
of  the  Old-Test,  services  in  the  temple  with 
their  bloody  offerings  of  animals,  which  came 
to  pass  three  years  after  they  had  been  inter- 
rupted by  Antiochus  Epiphaues  in  the  Maccabae- 
an  age  (1  Mace.  iv.  54-59),*  and  afterward  in  the 
antitype  by  the  historical  introduction  of  the 
more  perfect  sanctuary  and  worship  of  the  New 
Covenant,  whicli  were  likewise  foretold  by  the 
prophet  Zechariah  ichap.  iii.  9)  and  whose  sacri- 
ficial altar  is  Christ,  having  become  such  through 
the  cross  which  he  anointed  and  consecrated  by 
his  own  exalted  priestly  saci'ifice  and  blood,  f 

Verse  25.  Know  therefore  and  imderstand. 
This  exhortation  is  intended  to  introduce  the 
more  detailed  explanation  of  the  relation  of  the 
seventy  year-weeks  to  the  yet  unexpired  seventy 
years,  and  also  to  the  subject  of  the  earlier 
theocratic  promises  which  follows.  It  directs 
the  notice  of  both  the  hearer  and  the  reader  to 
the  importance  of  the  disclosures  now  to  be 
made,  and  to  the  duty  of  subjecting  them  to 
serious  and  thoughtful  consideration ;  cf.  o 
01  a;  (n.)rrm.ii'  jwi-i.i,  Matt.  xxiv.  15. — From  the 
going  forth  of  the  commandment  (or  "  word  ") 
to  restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem,  imto  the 
Messiah  the  Prince  shall  be  seven  iireeks ; 

•  [Keil  justly  objects  to  this  interpretation  of  the  fulfil- 
ment that  "  it  is  opi'osed  by  the  acttca!  fact,  that  neither  in 
the  consecration  of  Zerubbabel's  temple,  nor  at  the  reconse- 
cr.'ition  of  the  altar  of  burnt-offering  desecrated  by  Antio- 
chus, is  mention  made  of  any  anointing.  According  to  the 
definite,  uniform  tradition  of  the  Jews,  the  holy  anointing 
oil  did  not  e.vist  during  the  time  of  the  second  temple."  The 
term  "anoint,"  however,  may  here  be  taken  in  the  meta- 
phorical sense  of  redeJUatint/.] 

t  [Keil  likewise,  after  adducing  several  exegetical  reasons 
against  the  interpret.ition  oi  '•  most  holy  "  here  as  referring 
to  the  temple,  altar,  or  any  of  the  sacred  utensils,  finally 
concludes  that  "the  reference  is  to  the  anointing  of  a  new 
eanctuar>',  temple,  or  most  holy  place."  This,  however, 
makes  the  wliole  expression  metaphorical,  while  all  the  as- 
sociated phrases  are  taken  in  a  .sense  more  or  less  literal.  It 
seems  to  us  that  the  i-ejection  of  the  old  reference  of  the 
language  here  to  the  Messiah,  on  the  ground  of  the  absence 
of  the  article,  is  rather  hasty :  for  surely  the  words  may 
jti-tly  be  rendered  "  to  anoint  a  most  holy  "  (one  as  well  as 
tUln^/\.  and  thus  really  refer  to  the  inauguration  of  the  Head 
of  the  New  Dispensatinn.  The  expression  is  doubtless  to  be 
explained  in  conformity  with  the  simila*"  phraseology  of 
the  verses  immediately  loll-.iwing.  1 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27. 


197 


general  nsage  to  take  -''™V?  ii  an  adverbial 
sense  and  to  connect  it  with  the  following  verb, 
no  as  to  obtain  the  sense  "to  build  Jerusalem 
again,"  since  only  ;:i™  in  the  Kal  is  used  to 
designate  our  ••  again"  {rarsus,  iteruin)  in  other 
places  (£ind  also  here,  in  the  latter  half  of  the 
verse).  Wieseler's  rendering,  "to  lead  back," 
i.  f . ,  the  people,  is  opposed  in  part  by  the  harsh- 
ness of  such  an  objective  supplement,  and  partly 
by  the  impossibility  of  showing  that  this  pas- 
Rage  refers  directly  and  exclusively  back  to  Jer. 
xmx.  10,  where  -■'■w~J  certainly  occurs  in  the 
sense  of  "to  lead  back."  The  second  half  of 
the  verse,  moreover,  refers  only  to  a  rebuilding 
of  the  city  {~~:::/l  :1CP),  and  not  to  a  reduc- 
tio  pojJiiU  erulii,  which  is  decisive  in  favor  of  a 
restoration,  i.e.,  of  bringing  back  out  of  the 
Rtate  of  desolation;  cf.  Ezek.  xvi.  55. — Who  is 
designated  by  1^31  Il'^STp,  the  "anointed  one, 
the  prince  "  (or,  as  it  may  be  rendered  with 
equal  correctness,  the  "  anointed  prince  ;  "  cf. 
Ewald,  Le/irb.,  p.  741),  in  the  sense  of  the  pro- 
phet ?  Certainly  not  the  Messiah  of  Isrml  in  an 
immediate  and  primary  .<^ense,  as  the  Jewish 
and  orthodox  exegesis  has  generally  lield,  do%\Ti 
to  the  latest  time.  He  would  scarcely  have 
been  referred  to  as  "  an  anointed  prince"  with- 
out the  article ;  nor  would  Daniel  have  intro- 
duced Him  after  the  brief  interval  contained  in 
the  iirst  seven  of  the  seventy  year-weeks,  since 
he  always  places  the  advent  of  the  Me.ssiah  in 
the  distant  future,  when  the  fourth  and  last 
world-kingdom  shall  fall — which  is  especially 
apparent  in  chapters  ii,  and  vii.  *  The  reference 
is  probably  to  a  prince  contemporar.v  with  Dan- 
iel and  already  well  known,  who  was  destined 
to  exert  a  powerful  influence  in  favor  of  the 
theocracy,  and  to  fulfil  the  special  Divine  pur- 
pose relating  to  the  Israel  of  that  day  (about 
forty-nine  or  fifty  years  after  the  destruction  of 

chronolof^Ciil  determination  of  the  period  spok<*n  of.  lyeil, 
a1thoilc;ta  no  advocate  of  a  strict  literal  fulfilment  of  thip 
passage,  justly  remarks  that  '*all  such  references  {to  Jere- 
miah) are  excluded  by  the  fact  that  the  an:.iel  names  the 
comm:uidment  for  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem  as  the  tei'- 
mt>tu.i  a  qno  for  the  seventy  weeks,  and  could  thus  only 
mean  a  word  of  (rod  whoso  ^oins  forth  was  somewhere  de- 
termined, or  could  be  determined,  just  as  the  appearance  of 
the  Anoint*'d  Prince  is  named  as  the  termination  of  the 
seventy  weeks.  Accordingly.  '  the  going  forth  of  the  com- 
mandment to  restore,'  etc,  must  be  a  factum  coming  into 
visibility,  the  time  of  which  could  without  difficulty  be 
known — a  word  from  God  respecting  the  restoration  of 
Jerusalem,  which  went  forth  by  means  of  a  man  at  a  defi- 
nit*"  time,  and  received  an  observable  historical  execution." 
This  last  remark  effectually  disposes  of  the  author's  exegesis 
regarding  "^1   here.] 

•  [This  last  argument  is  certainly  out  of  place,  for  Daniel 
does  not  place  the  personage  in  question  at  an  interval  of 
only  seven  weeks,  but  of  seven  and  sixty-two  weeks,  i.e.,  all 
but  at  the  close  of  the  entire  period  of  the  prophecy.  So 
likewise  in  the  next  verse.  .\s  to  the  objection  against  the 
reference  to  the  Messiah,  both  here  and  in  the  following  and 
preceding  verses,  on  the  ground  of  the  absentx^  of  the  arti- 
cle, this  is  greatly,  if  not  wholly,  made  up  by  the  conntriic- 
ttoii  oi  the  noun  with  an  idjunct,  w^hich  in  Hebrew  often 
makes  a  word  really  deliuite.  so  that  the  article  is  readily 
dispensed  with.  Indeed,  the  simple  term  JT^CS,  MtmsUih, 
even  anarthrous,  is  so  emphatic  that  none  but  the  Great 
Prophet  of  Dent,  xviii.  IS  (where  K"^— 3  is  in  like  manner 

rendered  definite  only  by  the  adjunct  term)  can  well  be 
thought  of.  Accordingly,  those  interpreters  who  have  for- 
saken this  old  and  widely-.accepted  reference,  have  signally 
failed  to  adduce  any  other  historical  personage  to  whom  it 
can  be  fitly  applied.] 


Jerusalem  I — hence,  without  doubt,  to  Cyrns, 
who  is  designated  as  Jehovah's  Ma.shiach  in  Isa. 
xlviu.  1  also.  Cf.  Kranichfeld,  p.  327:  "Ra- 
ther, the  person  referred  to  appears  as  a  differ- 
ent prince,  who  has  a  theocratic  dominion,  and 
is  endowed  with  the  spirit  of  Jehovah  for  his 
calling  ;  cf  1  Sam.  xvi.  13  et  seq. ;  x.  1.  U  et 
seq.  But  since  the  special  mention  of  the  fea- 
ture of  anointing  in  the  case  of  the  ordinarj-, 
i.e.,  non-Messianic  national  kings  who  came  in 
contact  with  Israel  would  be  strange,  it  is  pro- 
per to  search  for  a  heathen  prince,  who  became 
prominent  as  the  promoter  of  the  theocracy, 
and  especially  so,  because  of  his  relation  to  the 
Messianic  hopes  before  referred  to.  As  such  a 
one,  and  unique  in  this  respect,  the  theocratic 
literature  conceives  of  Kortsh.  the  victor  from 
the  east  who  effected  the  return  of  Israel  from 
the  exile.  He  is  expressly  designated  in  Isa. 
xlv.  1  as  the  Mashiach  of  Jehovah.  He  appears 
in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Darius  Medus 
over  Babylon,  therefore  at  the  time  of  the 
vision,  and  was  then  at  least  the  victorious 
leader  of  the  armies  of  Darius.  We  are  com- 
pelled to  decide  for  him,  in  interpreting  the 
-,-".  n"'™?a  of  Daniel's  description.  He  was 
regarded  as  the  executor  of  the  will  of  Jehovah 
already  referred  to,  agreeably  to  the  description 
which  immediately  follows,  .and  in  harmony  with 
the  theoratic  hopes  which  Israel  based  on  him. 
Having  realized  other  prophetic  expectations, 
the  author  regarded  him  af.  the  agent  who  should 
bring  about  the  restoration  and  the  rebuilding 
of  Jerusalem  ;  and  consequently,  the  writer  ex- 
pressly confirms  these  expectations,  since  he 
merely  separates  from  them  the  direct  Messianic 
idea,  which  he  finds  himself  obliged  to  refer  to 
a  more  distant  future,  in  view  of  the  course  of 
political   events."  * — The    "  Mashiach    Nagid," 

•  IKeil'B  remarks  on  this  point  seem  to  us  so  satisfactory 
that  we  transcribe  them  in  full.  ''The  words  "113!  n^'w^ 
are  not  to  be  translated  an  anointed  one,  a  pytnce  (Ber- 
tholdt)  :  for  n'^'.r'i  cannot  be  on  adjective  to  ^^3!,  be- 
cause in  Hebr.  the  ailjective  is  placed  after  the  snlistantive, 
with  few  exceptions  which  are  inapplicable  to  this  case  ;  cf. 
in  Ewald's  Lehrb.,  %  29.3  b.  Nor  can  n'^ir?3  be  a  participle  : 
till  a  prince  {in)  anointed  (Steudel).  but  it  is  a  noun,  and 
T^3t  is  connected  with  it  by  apposition  ;  an  anointed  ont 

{who  is  at  the  same  time)  a  prince.  According  to  the  O.  T., 
kings  and  priests,  and  only  these,  were  anointed.  Since 
then,  rr^UJO  is  brought  forward  as  the  principal  designa- 
tion, we  may  not  by  T'aD  think  of  a  priest^prince,  but 
only  of  a  prince  of  the  people ;  nor  by  n^THJJS  of  a  king, 
but  only  of  a  priest ;  and  by  T^31  rflCKl  we  must  nndei^ 

stand  a  person  who,  first  and  specially,  is  a  priest,  and  in 
addition  is  a  prince  of  the  people,  a  king.  The  separation 
of  the  two  words  in  ver.  20.  where   T13j     is  acknowledged 

as  meaning  a  prince  of  the  people,  leads  to  the  same  conclu- 
sion. This  prie.st-king  can  neitlier  beZenibbabel  (according 
to  many  old  inteniretors).  nor  Ezra  (Steudel).  nor  Onias  III. 
( Wieseler) :  for  Zerubbahel  the  prince  was  not  anointed,  and 
the  priest  Ezra  and  the  high-priest  Onias  were  not  princes 
of  the  people.  Nor  can  Cyrus  be  meant  here,  as  Saadias, 
Gaon.,  Bertholdt.  Von  T^engerke.  Maurcr,  Ewald,  Hitzig, 
Kranichfeld,  and  others,  think,  by  a  reference  to  Is.a.  xlv.  1  ; 
for,  supposing  it  to  be  the  case  that  Daniel  had  reason  from 
Isa.  xlv.  1  to  call  Cyrus  n'^UT'S— which  is  doubted,  since 

from  his  epithet  irT^'w^S.  //'S  (Jehovah's)  f77io/;i(ed,  whict 
Isaiah  uses  of  Cyrus,  it  does  not  follow,  of  course,  that  He 


UIS 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


accorclingly,  is  in  himself  merely  a  type  of  the 
Messiah,  corresponding  to  the  person  introduced 
in  Isii.  xlv.,  but  is  not  Christ  Himself  (correctly 
rendered  hy  Saad.,  Gaon. ,  Bertholdt,  Von  Leng  , 
Hitzig-,  Bleek.  Kamph. .  etc. .  with  the  exception, 
however,  that  they  generally  reject  the  typical 
Messianic  sense  as  well  as  the  direct  reference  to 
Christ).  This  typical  forerunner  of  Christ,  the 
first  restorer  of  the  theocracy  in  the  age  of 
Daniel  itself,  is  placed  by  the  prophet  at  the 
close  of  the  first  cycle  of  seven  Sabbatic  years, 
and  hence  after  the  expiration  of  the  first  jubi- 
lee-period which  had  elapsed  since  the  prophetic 
activity  of  Jeremiah,  while  he  assigns  sixty-two 
additional  weeks  of  years  (or  nearly  nine  jubilee- 
Iieriods)  to  the  interval  of  tribulation  that  an- 
nounced and  prepared  for  the  coming  of  the 
genuine  antitypical  Christ.  *  Several  expositors 
attempt  to  substantiate  the  direct  Messianic 
interpretation  of  T'^"  n^C)3,  by  placing  the 
seven  weeks  referred  to  in  this  passage  after 
the  sixty-two  weeks  which  follow  (Von  Hof- 
mann.  Wieseler  in  the  Giittinger  Gelehrten- 
Aiizeiycii.  1.S4B.  Delitzsch,  etc.),  and  thus  "reck- 
on the  contents  of  the  seventy  backward  ;  "  but 
if  Daniel  had  jiref erred  this  order  he  would 
certainly  have  noticed  the  sixty-two  weeks  first 
and  the  seven  weeks  afterwards,  and,  moreover, 
the  ime  week  in  v.  27  cannot  be  suitably  pro- 
vided for.  Finally,  all  that  has  been  heretofore 
observed  against  the  direct  Messianic  interpre- 
tation of  that  expression,  militates  against  their 
view.  Upon  the  whole,  cf.  the  "history  of  the 
exposition"  in  appendix  to  exeget.  remarks. — 
And  three-score  and  two  weeks ;  the  street 

should  be  named  n''!li?3 the  title  ought  at  least  to  have 

T 

been  n""'!.''^  T'3'',  the  n"^",r'3  being  an  adjective  fol- 
lowing n^nr,  because  there  is  no  evident  reason  for  the 

express  precedence  of  the  adjective  definition. 

'■  The  O.  T.  knows  only  one  who  shnll  be  both  priest  and 
kins  in  one  person  (Psa,  ex.  4;  Zcch.  vi,  1-3),  Christ  the 
Mes.sias  (John  iv.  25),  whom,  with  Hiivernick,  Henpsten- 
berg,  Hofmann,  Auberlen,  Delitzsch,  and  Kliefoth,  we  here 
understand  by  the  ""^31  rT''j;?3,  because  in  Him  the  two 
essential  requisites  of  the  theocratic  king,  the  anointing  and 
the  appointment  to  be  the  "I'l^"!  of  the  people  of  Ckid  (cf. 

1  Snm.  X.  1 ;  xiii.  14  :  xvi.  13  :  xxv.  oO  :  2  Sam.  ii.  4  :  v.  2 
sell.),  are  found  in  the  most  perfect  manner.  The.se  requi- 
sit*.s  are  here  attributed  to  Him  as  predicates,  and  in  such 
a  manner  that  the  being  anointed  goes  before  the  being  a 
prince,  in  order  to  make  prominent  the  spiritual,  priestly 
character  of  His  royalt.v,  and  tt)  desi^ate  Him,  on  the 
ground  of  the  pro})ljecics,  Isa.  Ixi.  1—3  and  Iv.  4,  as  the  per- 
son by  whom  'tlie  sure  mercies  of  David'  (Isa.  Iv.  y)  shall 
be  realized  to  the  covenant  people.  The  absence  of  the 
definite  article  is  not  to  be  explained  by  saying  that  n^i',!;^! 

somewhat  as  n?3y,  Zech,  iii.  8  ;  vi.  12,  is  used  Kar'  k^o\,  as 
a  no^nen  propr.  of  the  Messiah,  the  Anointed ;  for  in  that 
case   T^32  ought  to  have  the  article,  since  in  Hebrew  we 

cannot  say  Tl'^Z   Til,  but  only   Tlb'Sn  "ill.    Much  ra- 

I  T     -  ■    T  '  ^    -T    -  ■    T 

ther  the  article  is  wanting,  because  it  shall  not  be  said  :  till 
the  Meaiia/i,  wl'tt  is  pi'iJtce,  but  only,  till  une  coine»  who  is 
Unomted  and  at  the  same  time  pHHCe,  because  He  that  is  to 
come  is  not  detinitely  designated  as  the  expected  Messiah, 
but  must  be  made  prominent  by  the  predicates  ascribed  to 
Him  as  a  personage  altogether  singular.''] 

*  [How  ill  the  chronological  elements  of  tlie  prophecy  ac- 
cord with  the  n-ference  of  this  anointed  one  and  prince  to 
C.\Tus,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  the  author  is  obliged  to 
sever  Daniel's  conjoined  statement  (7+1)2)  in  order  to  elfect 
anyrhing  like  an  agreement.  Yet  even  thus  the  historical 
fultllmeut  hiis  to  be  vaguely  presumeit,  and  cannot  be  defi- 
aiteiy  verilied.] 


shall  be  built  again,  etc. ;  rather,  "and  (dur- 
ing) three-score  and  two  weeks  (it>  shall  return 
(or  'be  restored ')  and  be  built."  *  This  period 
of  sixty-two  weeks,  ihe  "  result  of  subtracting 
the  significant  seven  at  the  beginning,  and  of 
one  to  be  reserved  for  the  end,"  covers  the  time 
during  which  the  heathen  world-kingdoms  suc- 
ceed each  other,  down  to  the  fourth  and  most 
godless  power,  which  is  to  attempt  to  entirelj 
suppress  the  Divine  kingdom  of  the  Old  Cove- 
nant that  had  meanwhile  been  perfectly  restored, 
although  with  much  labor,  but  which  b3'  that 
very  effort  secured  its  own  destruction  through 
the  Messianic  judgment  (cf.  viii.  11  et  seq.  ;  'i'i 
et  seq.,  and  the  preceding  parallels).  The  sub- 
ject of  nii:3"l  ^'l-?!,  which  must  be  supplied, 
is  doubtless  Jerusalem,  in  analogy  with  the 
former  half  of  the  verse,  where  the  same  idea 
is  presented  in  an  active  form.  The  specifica- 
tion of  time,  O"!  C"iS'i"  aiJ'l'i"'',  which  precedes 
in  the  accusative,  "  marks  the  limits  of  the 
period,  within  which,  at  different  times,  the 
building  was  prosecuted  "  (Hitzig). — The  limi- 
tation of  this  period,  beginning  a  new  clause  as 
it  does,  is  properly  preceded  by  an  Athnach. 
which  serves  to  divide  the  verse.  The  method 
adopted  by  the  ancient  translators,  by  Luther, 
and  by  a  majority  of  subsequent  expositors  (in- 
cluding Hengstenb  ,  Hiivem.,  Auberl.,  Ziindel, 
etc. — but  not  Kranichfeld,  Kliefoth,  and  FoUer), 
divides  the  verse  so  as  to  connect  the  "  sixty-two 
weeks  with  the  preceding  clause,  despite  the 
Athnach,  and  thus  obtains  sixty-nine  weeks  as 
the  time  that  should  elapse  before  the  coming 
of  the  anointed  prince  ;  but  it  is  evidently  based 
on  the  desire  to  give  a  direct  Messianic  bearing 
to  the  passage.  It  is  opposed  (1)  by  the  fact 
that  the  sixty- two  weeks  are  repeated  in  v.  26, 
where  they  are  preceded  by  the  article,  which 
clearly  marks  them  as  an  independent  period ; 
(2)  that  the  clause  ""^l  -Vitl  thus  occupies  a 
very  abrupt  and  bare  position,  being  without 
any  designation  of  time,  while  the  preceding 
clause  hits  two  ;  (3)  that  the  sense  of  the  writer 
clearly  is  that  the  rebuilding  and  restoration 
had  not  begun  before  the  sixty-two  weeks, 
whUe  he  evidently  regards  the  seven  weeks  as  a 
period  of  desolation  and  ruinous  neglect  of  the 
city  which  afterward  was  to  be  built  (cf.  Hitzig, 
p.   100;   also  Kliefoth.  p    328   et   seq  j.f— The 

*  [The  only  justification  of  this  translation,  which  separ- 
ates the  two  periods  of  seven  weeks  and  sixty-two  w-eeks, 
assigning  the  former  as  the  ternutnts  ad  qiteui  of  the 
1  Anointed  Prince,  and  the  latter  as  the  time  of  rebuilding, 
lies  m  the  Masoretic  interpnnction,  which  places  the  Athnach 
between  them.  Some  adduce  also  the  fact  that  ttie  1  con- 
nective is  likewise  at  the  point,  and  not  at  2T,irr.     But 

these  arguments,  especially  the  latter,  are  not  conclumve ; 
and  the  rendering  in  question  involves  a  harsh  construction 
of  the  second  member,  being  without  a  projinsition.  It  is 
better,  therefore,  and  simpler,  to  adhere  to  the  Authorized 
Version,  wiiich  follow-s  all  the  older  translations.  Keil.  in- 
deed (although  admitting  that  the  Masoretii:  |>unctuat!on  is 
neither  authoritative  nor  decisive),  dep  irts  from  it,  but  en- 
deavors to  extricate  himself  from  the  chronological  ditllcnl- 
ties  resulting  by  his  interiiretation  of  these  "  weeks"  ns  not 
being  heptades'of  years.  Stuai-t,  too,  insists  upon  the  Slaso- 
retic  separation,  but  he  is  thereby  led  into  a  maze  of  inter- 
pretation from  which  he  confesses  he  sees  no  satisfactory 
exit.] 

t  [These  arguments,  however,  have  little  weight :  ford, 
the  sixty  two  weeks  are  still  "an  inilependent  period." 
namely,  that  following  the  seven  weeks  of  rebuilding,  i.tf., 
coveriiig  the  whole  period  of  the  restored  city  do\vn  to  the 


CHAP.  IX.  1- 


19S 


street  shall  be  built  again,  aad  the  \7all,  even 
in  troublous  times;  rather,  (with)  street  and 
ditch,  but  in  troublous  times.  f^'^'^l  2^^^..  a 
combination  that  suggests  ^ni  nmn,  Isa.  xxvi. 
1.  is  evidently  an  adverbial  apposition  to  the 
subject  S^;'.j:^~"^  ;  and  there  properly  signifies 
"street-and-ditch-%vise,"  i.e.,  with  streets  and 
ditches.  It  was  not  to  be  a  wretched,  confused, 
and  scattered,  as  well  as  a  defenceless  mass  of 
houses,  but  was  to  be  arranged  in  streets,  and 
to  be  surrounded  \rith  a  fortified  (wall  and) 
ditch.  ["  l"n~  means  the  street  and  the  wide 
space  before  the  gate  "'  (Keil.  who  adds  "before 
the  temple,"  but  this  la.st  is  by  no  means  cer- 
taiJi-)]  T'^'C  is  regarded  by  most  modems,  and 
certainly  with  justice,  as  synonymous  with  the 
Chald.  '<"^""'.r?.  "ditch."  This  rendering  is  in- 
directly supported  by  the  ancient  versions  also, 
which  hare  "wall"  (Sept.,  Theodot.  :  oiKoinuri- 
&i/r:frn'  ~/nraa  Kai  — ep(rf/,^-of ;  Vulgate;  "  ?'?/r- 
jum  tfdificiihitur phitea  et  muri").  Hitzig arbi- 
trarily asserts  that  the  verb  n-"L:  will  not 
admit  of  such  an  interpretation  of  ■^'T^n-  On 
his  view,  the  word  is  synonymous  with  ~')\^,> 
Ezek.  xli.  12,  and  gives  the  meaning  "accord- 
ing to  street  imd  court."  Hofmann  adopts  a 
similar  rendering,  "  extension  and  bounded 
space,"  as  do  also  Kliefoth  and  Fiiller,  "  open- 
ing and  limitation."  Grotius,  on  the  other 
hand,  conceives  of  an  "  aqueduct,"  Dathe,  of 
the  Divine  "  judgment,"  and  several  others  take 
ynni  as  a  parenthetic  supplement,  signifying 
"and  it  is  determined"  (decided),  or,  "as  it  is 
determined"  (Hitzig,  in  Stud.  u.  Krit..  1833, 
Hengstenb.,  Hiivernick,  Von  Lengerke,  Wiese- 
ler,  Kranichfeld).  * — """RJn  pi^^^  expresses  the 
reason  why  so  long  a  time  is  required  to  build 
and  restore,  and  therefore  stands  in  an  adversa- 
tive relation  to  the  preceding  (T="but,  how- 
ever"). The  historical  commentary  on  this 
"but  in  troublous  times"  is  found  in  the  narra- 
tives of  Ezra  and  Xehemiah,  respecting  the  fre- 
quent disturbing  and  interruption  of  the  rebuild- 
ing of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  in  the  time  of  the 
Persian  kings ;  cf.  especially  Neh.  ix.  36,  37. 


appearance  of  the  Anointed  One  and  Prince  :  (2)  the  panse 
before  the  statement  of  the  rebnildinK  of  the  ''street  and 
wall"  is  jn-tified  and  even  required  by  the  fact  that  this  is 
evidently  a  resumption  of  the  former  declaration  of  the 
'■building:  of  Jenlsalem  : "  (3)80  far  from  this  period  of 
rebuilding  being  delayed  till  some  '-ubsequent  event,  it  is 
Bet  forth  as  the  very  initial  terminuJt  a  quo  of  the  entire 
prophecy.  We  may  add,  that  the  subdivision  of  the  sixty- 
nine  weeks  into  two  portions  of  seven  and  sixty-two  weeks 
respectively  perfectly  corresponds  with  the  a.'wignment,  in 
the  same  connection  and  order,  of  two  distinct  events, 
lamely,  the  completed  reconstruction  for  the  former  por- 
tion, and  the  Messianic  advent  for  the  latter.  If,  on  the 
:ontrary  view,  v.-e  appropriate  the  sixty-two  weeks  to  the 
reconstruction-period,  we  fall  into  several  exegetical  contra- 
lictions ;  {i )  we  confound  it  with  the  Messiah-jJeriod,  which 
-s  descri(>ed  in  very  different  terms,  ver.  2(i ;  (2)  we  leave  no 
special  transaction  for  the  preceding  seven  years  ;  (3)  we 
make  the  ile.ssijih  i>eriod  \astly  too  long  for  its  d.^'=i>ite  limi- 
tation in  ver.  ST.  Other  difflculties  of  a  histor-al  charac- 
ter win  be  adduced  presently.] 

♦  [We  suece-t.  as  best  suited  to  the  etymological  import 
of  these  two  terms,  as  well  as  their  proverbial  antithesis  and 
adverl<iai  adjecrtion  to  the  sentence,  the  sense  of  '•  court  and 
alley."  I.e.,  broad  square,  and  close  street ;  to  denote  the 
oomplcte  restoration  of  the  city,  with  all  ita  places  of  resort 
and  thoroughfare.] 


'"  The  city  was  inhabited  in  t^he  second  year  of 
Darius  Hystaspis  (Hag.  i.  4),  but  had  neithei 
walls  nor  gates  (cf.  Zech.  ii.  8,  9) ;  up  te  that 
time  the  enemies  of  the  Jews  had  prevented  the 
building  of  the  temple  and  of  the  walls  either 
by  cunning  or  by  force  (Ezra  iv.  4,  5.  12,  23  et 
seq.).  In  the  twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus  the  walls  and  gates  had  again  been 
destroyed  (Neh.  i  3) ;  and  the  renewed  building 
succeeded   only   imder    manifold    precautions : 

•  Neh.  iii.  33  ;  iv.  1,  2  et  seq. ;  vi.  1  et  seq."  *  (Hit- 
zig). Any  reference  of  the  ex]>ressiou  to  dis- 
turbances encountered  in  the  building  up  of  the 
church,  or  the  New-Test,  kingdom  of  God,  can 
only  be  admitted  in  a  typical  sense,  since  the 
primary  reference  of  the  passage  is  solely  to 
Jerusalem  in  the  period  following  the  captivity. 
When  Kranichfefd,  p.  829,  declares  that  P'i^?^ 
D"'r;>~  is  "  the  modifying  factor  connected  with 
oracles  like  Jer.  xxxi.  38;  Isa.  liv.  11;  Ix.  10; 
Ezek.  xlv.  6;  xlviii.  8,  15  et  seq.,"  he  thereby 
substantially  contradicts  his  ordinary  interpre- 
tation of  the  passage,  which  is  only  typically 
Messianic,  and  he  is  guilty  of  an  inconsequent 
vacillation  in  the  direction  of  the  strict  ilessi- 
anic  theory. 

Verse  20).  And  after  (the  +)  threescore  and 
two  weeks  shall  the  Messiah  be  cut  o£f; 
rather,  "an  anointed  one."  Smce  the  period 
covered  by  the  sixty-two  weeks  (or  434  years)  is 
preceded  by  the  seven  weeks  (or  forty-niue 
years)  according  to  the  above,  the  event  here 
predicted  must  faU  into  the  last  of  the  seventy 
weeks  in  v.  24.  as  the  ne.xt  verse  expressly 
states.  Hence  the  n"",l"2  who  is  to  be  cut  off 
during  that  final  year-week  cannot  possibly  b6 
identified  with  the  ~'}\  '?^"'rr  whom  the  pre- 
ceding verse  introduced  already  on  the  expira- 
tion of  the  secenth  of  the  seventy  weeks  of 
years.t     Instead  of  an  "anointed  prince,"  wo 

■are  here  referred  simply  to  an  "  anointed  one." 
who  is,  moreover,  placed  in  such  an  intimate 
relation  to  "the  city  and  the  sanctuary  "  in  the 
second  halt  of  the  verse — i.e.,  to  Jerusalem  and 
the  temple  located  there — that  he  is  brought 
into  sharp  and  clearly  defined  contra.st  with  the 
"  prmce  "  and  people  who  destroy  that  city  and 
its  sanctuary.  A  high  prient  nf  Ltnid  is  evi- 
dently intended,  whom  the  people  of  the  forei^'n 
and  hostile  prince  "cuts  off"  (CTir"^),  i.e., 
"destroys,  kills"  (cf.  Gen.  ix.  11;  Deut.  xx. 
20;  Jer.  xi.  19;  Psa.  xxxvii.  9;  Prov.  U.  22; 


♦  [That  the  reconstruction  of  the  cit)'  wall,  however,  waa 
coiupleted  at  this  last  date  is  certain  from  Xeh.  vi.  15.  This 
was  B.  C.  44fi.  The  temple  had  been  rebuilt  a  long  time, 
Ezra  vi,  15.  B.  C  517.  During  Nehemiah's  administration 
the  whole  process  of  restoration  was  evidently  etfected.  It 
is  impossible,  thei  efore.  to  protract  this  perioii  over  the  sixty- 
two  year-weeks,  as  the  author  seeks  to  do.  The  historical 
interpretation  here  fails  completely.  From  whuiever  point 
of  -time  we  reckon  the  first  forty-nine  years,  they  certainly 
included  this  work  of  reconstruction.] 

t  [The  article  here  only  shows  that  the  period  in  question 
agrees  in  general  with  that  similarly  stated  in  the  prejed- 
ing  verse.  That  the>^  do  not  exactly  coincide  is  clear  from 
the  fact  that  the  terminua  oil  quern  of  the  two  is  differently 
stated:  in  the  one  it  is  "till  the  Messiah,'' in  the  other, 
down  to  his  '■  ctttting  off."  The  difference  in  time  is  accu- 
rately detined  by  the  following  verse.] 

i  [This  objection  to  the  identification  of  the  }ffui/itach  in 
both  cases  is  entirely  obviated  by  the  above  note  of  tba 
variation  in  *he  limits  of  the  two  chronological  terms.] 


200 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


I.  31,  etc.).*  And  since  the  hostile  prince  is 
niiequivocaUy  characterized  in  both  vs.  2(;  b  and 
27  as  the  niler  of  the  antitheistic  and  anti- 
Christian  world-power,  and  as  the  originator  of 
the  blasphemous  and  sacrilegious  horrors  which 
already  appeared  in  chap.  vii.  25 ;  viii.  1 1  et 
seq. ,  it  will  evidently  be  appropriate  to  regard  a 
high  priest  who  fell  at  the  hands  of  heathen 
persecutors  in  the  period  of  religious  oppression 
under  the  Seleucidfe  as  the  "  anointed  one,"  in 
whose  death  the  prophecy  before  us  was  prim- 
arily, although  but  typically,  fulfilled.  Such  a 
person  is  found  in  the  high  priest  Onias  III. 
who  was  murdered  by  Andronicus,  the  governor 
under  Epiphanes,  according  to  2  Mace.  iii.  31  et 
seq.;  iv.  1  et  seq.,  and  to  him  the  prophecy 
may  be  referred  with  the  highest  probability 
that  the  interpretation  is  correct.  According  to 
2  Mace.  iv.  34  et  seq.,  the  slaying  of  this 
anointed  one  took  place  before  the  second  cam- 
paign undertaken  by  Epiphanes  against  Egypt, 
and  shortly  before  the  king  arrived  at  Tyre  on 
his  return  from  Cilicia  (ct.  ibid.,  vs.  22,  30,  44; 
chap.  V.  1).  Hence,  it  certainly  transpired  be- 
fore the  abuse  of  the  city  and  its  sanctuary  by 
the  same  king,  a  feature  with  which  the  descrip- 
tion in  this  verse  harmonizes  well  upon  the 
whole  [but  with  some  fatal  exceptions] .  A  dis- 
crepancy exists  in  a  chronological  aspect  only 
■between  that  event  and  the  statements  in  the 
prophecy  ;  for,  while  the  sixty-two  weeks  of 
years  extend,  when  reckoned  from  the  end  of 
the  first  seven  year-weeks  or  B.C.  539,  to  B.C. 
105  or  into  the  reign  of  the  Asmonsean  Aristo- 
bulus  I.  or  his  successor  Alexander  Jannieus 
(after  105),  the  murder  of  Onias  by  Andronicus 
took  place  as  early  as  141  or  142  of  the  aira  of 
the  Seleucidae,  i.e..  B.C.  171  or  172,  and  there- 
fore in  the  fifty-third  week  of  years  after  B.C. 
539.  Consequently,  if  it  be  conceded  that  all 
the  remaining  assumptions  are  correct,  it  must 
be  acknowledged  that  the  prophecy  is  not  con- 
sistent with  itself  in  a  chronological  aspect,  or 
that  the  prophet  saw  events  belonging  to  differ- 
ent periods  in  a  single  comprehensive  view — in 
other  words,  that  he  conceived  of  a  catastrophe 
in  the  historical  future,  which  was  decidedly 
important  to  the  nations  concerned,  as  belong- 
ing to  a  period,  later  by  a  number  of  years  (per- 
haps ten  weeks  of  years,  or  seventy  years)  than 
it  actually  transpired.  Cf.  iufra,  eth.-fund. 
principles,  etc.     Nos.  1  and  2.f — The  following 

*  [Keii  insists  that  ri*i5*  does  not  necessarily  denote  a 

violent  death.  But  the  passages  adduced  by  the  author  are 
Bufficient  to  establish  this  as  the  general  meaning.  The 
"orthodox^'  interpretation  of  this  clause  as  referring  to  the 
cmcifi.^ion  of  the  Messiah  is  certainly  well  sustained.] 

t  [This  admission  of  failure  to  meet  the  chronological 
terms  of  the  prophecy  sufficiently  points  out  the  fallacy  of 
the  author's  interpretation.  The  Anointed  one  of  this  verse 
can  be  no  other  than  that  of  the  preceding  verse.  "The 
circumtitance  that  in  ver,  26  n*^llf  T3  has  neither  the  article 

nor  the  addition  ^*133  following  it  appears  to  be  in  favor 
of  this  opinion.  The  absence  of  the  one  as  well  as  of  the 
other  denotes  that  rj^T2i?2,  after  what  is  said  of  Him  in 

consideration  of  tlie  connection  of  the  words,  needs  no  more 
special  description.  If  we  observe  that  the  destruction  of 
the  city  anil  sanctuary  is  so  connected  with  the  Maxhiach 
that  we  must  consider  this  as  the  immediate  or  first  conse- 
quence of  the  cutting  off  of  the  MankUtch,  and  that  the 
destruction  shall  be  brought  alxiut  by  a  ynglu,  then  by 
MtuhUich  we  can  understand  neither  a  secular  prince  or 
tdntSt  nor  simply  a  high  priest,  but  only  an  anointed  one  who 


diverging  interpretations  are  to  be  rejected :  (1) 
That  adopted  by  Eichhom,  Corrodi,  Wieselor, 
Hitzig,  Kamphausen,  etc.,  which  comes  especi- 
ally near  our  own ;  they  regard  the  anointed  one 
as  being  Onias,  but  reckon  the  sixty-two  year- 
weeks,  which  closed  at  the  time  of  his  death, 
from  B.C.  604  instead  of  539,  so  that  the  first 
seven  weeks  are  not  to  be  counted  ( ?;.  or  rather, 
are  included  in  the  sixty-two  (?) — since  604- 
434  actually  results  in  170,  the  number  of  the 
year  in  which  Onias  died  ;  (2)  The  similar  view 
of  WieseliSr  (Gdtt.  Gd.-Anz.  1840)  and  of  De- 
litzsch  (upon  the  whole  that  of  Hofmann  also, 
Wei'is.  nnd  Erf.,  p.  303  et  seq.),  which  holds 
that  Onias  is  the  anointed  one,  at  whose  cutting 
off  the  sixty-two  weeks  of  years  from  B.C.  004 
were  to  have  expired ;  but  that  the  seven  weeks 
are  to  be  placed  after  the  year-week  which  be- 
gan with  the  year  of  his  death — hence  are  to  be 
reckoned  from  B.C.  104  (cf.  on  the  impossibility 
i  of  this  assumption,  supra,  on  v.  25);  (3)  The 
opinion  of  Bleek,  Maurer,  v.  Lengerke,  Roesch, 
Ewald,  etc.,  that  the  anointed  one  who  was  cut 
off  was  not  the  high  priest  Onias,  but  the  king 
Seleucus  IV.  Philopater,  of  Syria,  who  was 
killed  by  the  usurper  Heliodorus  in  B.C.  170  ; 
this  opinion  involves  still  greater  chronological 
difliculties  than  the  former,  inasmuch  as  the 
sixty-two  weeks  of  years,  when  reckoned  back 
from  B.C.  176,  would  extend  to  B.C.  610;  and 
it  is  opposed,  moreover,  by  the  inadmissible 
character  of  an  attempt  to  explain  '!'^"'r'3  by 
"king;"  (4)  That  of  Bertholdt,  who  believes 
that  the  passage  refers  to  the  death  of  Alexander 
the  Great  ( !),  who  left  no  heir  ;  (5)  The  assump- 
tion of  Kranichfeld,  that  the  anointed  one  is  the 
Messiah  of  Israel,  as  in  Psa,  ii.  2  ;  Isa.  Ixi.  1, 
and  therefore  not  identical  with  the  "  anointed 
prince  "  of  v.  25,  but  not  less  distinct  also  from 
Onias,  the  murdered  high-priest  of  Maccaba^an 
times;  (0)  The  orthodox  churchly  view  which 
identifies  the  "  anointed  one  "  with  the  "anoint- 
ed prince  "  of  the  preceding  verse,  and  believes 
that  both  denote  Christ,  whose  sufferings  and 
death  are  said  to  be  predicted  in  a  similar  man- 
ner by  sb  ps*"!  CT^B"),  as  in  Isa.  liii.  (held  among 
moderns,  «.^.,  by  Havern.,  Hengstenb. ,  Auberl., 
Pusey  [KeU] ,  etc. ) ;  (7)  The  assertion  by  Klie- 
foth  (on  Zech.  xiii.  7  and  also  on  this  passage) 
that  the  anointed  one  is  Christ,  but  only  in  the 
final  stage  of  his  work  and  government  among 
the  kingdoms  of  the  earth ;  and  further,  that 
the  passage,  "  Uke  Luke  xvii.  25;  3  Thess.  ii. 
7.  describes  the  relation  to  the  world  and  man- 
kind which  Christ  shall  occupy  by  reason  of  the 
great  apostasy  before  the  end  of  the  world,  as 
prophecy  leads  us  to  expect." — But  not  for  him- 
self; rather,  "  and  he  has  no  one,"  i.e.,  "for  his 
helper,  his  deliverer  from  death  ;  "  or  "  he  has 


stands  in  such  a  relation  to  the  city  and  sanctuary,  that  with 
his  being  '  cut  off'  the  city  and  the  sanctuary  lose  not  only 
their  piotcction  and  their  protector,  hut  the  sanctuary  also 
loses  at  the  same  time,  its  character  as  the  sanctuaiy  which 
the  Mashiach  had  given  to  it.  This  is  suitable  to  no  Jew- 
ish high-priest,  but  only  to  the  Messias  whom  Jehovah 
anointed  to  be  a  Priest-King  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek, 
and  placed  as  Lord  over  Zion,  his  holy  hill.  We  ngree  theie- 
fore  with  H:tvcrni<k.  Hcncrstenberg.  .\ulicrlen.  nnd  Kliefoth, 
whi'  r'L'ard  the  M'tt'hin'li  <if  this  verse  as  identical  with  the 
Mtinl'i'flt  Naiiiil  of  V(  r.  2.5  as  Christ,  who,  in  the  fttllest 
sense  of  the  wtrd,  is  the  Anointed,  and  we  hope  to  cstablLsh 
this  view  more  fully  in  the  following  exposition  of  the  his 
toncal  reference  of  this  word  of  the  ant^^l." — A'ei/]. 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27. 


201 


nothing,  there  remains  nothing  to  him  "  (^v  l^», 
namely  ""'Hp,  cf.  Filler  and  Kranichfeld  on 
this  passage).  This  "b  V?"  meets  with  an  ex- 
traordinary variety  of  interpretations,  based  re- 
Bpectiyely  on  the  different  explanations  of  n^'.l"'!- 
Theodotion  ;  Aa'  Kp:ija  ovk  fcra'  iv  airu ;  Jerome : 
"  et  noil  erit  ejus  populus  qvi  eum  neyatums  est " 
(in  like  manner  also  Grotius,  and  a  majority  of 
Roman  Catholic  expositors) ;  Bertholdt :  '"  and 
he  (Alex,  the  Gr. )  shall  have  no  successor;  "  v. 
Lengerke,  Roesch,  Bleek,  Ewald,  etc:  "and 
he  (Seleucus  Philopater)  shall  have  no  succes- 
sor ;"  VVieseler  :  "  and  he  (Onias)  shall  have  no 
son;"  Auberlen  :  '"he,  Christ,  shall  have  no 
adherents ;  "  Hofmann,  Hengsteub. ,  Kranichf. , 
Kliefoth  (and  similarly  also  Calvin,  Junius,  Eb- 
rard)  :  "he,  Christ,  shall  possess  nothing,  shall 
be  without  possessions,  and  be  deprived  of 
everything;"  Hofmann  (in  Weks.  unel  Erf.): 
'■  and  there  shall  not  be  to  the  people,"  i.e.,  an 
anointed  one.  the  people  shall  have  no  Messiah  ;* 
Havernick  :  ".and  not  for  himself,  i.e..  for  his 
own  sake," — supply,  "shall  the  Messiah  die, 
but  for  the  benefit  of  mankind,  which  is  to  be 
redeemed  ;  "  Michaelis.  E.  C.  Schmidt  (in  Paulus' 
Meynorabil.  VII.  51),  Wie.ieler  (in  GOtt.  Gel.-Am., 
1846),  Hitzig  :  "  and  he  is  not,  i.e.,  Onias  "  ( — 
ib  V?  consequently  =  ':.:"»,  cf.  Gen  v.  24). 
Upon  the  whole  cf.  Kliefoth.  p.  357  et  seq. 
Since  the  forcible  cutting  off  of  an  anointed 
one  is  concerned,  we  are  obliged  to  regard  that 
explanation  as  being  most  consistent  with  the 
context,  which  supplies  ""V"r.  perhaps  (cf. 
Psa.  vii.  .3  ;  1.  22;  Isa.  v.  29)  after  Vj  VS"".  It 
does  not  differ  materially  from  that  advocated 
by  Hofmann,  Hengstenberg,  Kranichfeld,  etc., 
which  supplies  D'l^S';  ;  for  whoever  has  no  de- 
liverer or  helper  is  also  without  power,  ^^^thout 
posses.sions,  \vithout  anything  whatever.  We 
differ  from  those  expositors  only  in  regarding 
the  anointed  one  who  is  described  as  being  with- 
out possessions  and  helpless,  not  directly  as  the 
Messiah,  but  more  immediately  as  his  type,  the 
Jewish  high  priest  who  was  killed  in  the  course 
of  the  Antiochian  persecution, — in  short,  in 
substituting  the  typical  Messianic  theory  for  the 
direct  (in  which  we  agree  substantially  with 
Ftiller). — And  the  people  of  the  prince  that 
shall  come  shall  destroy  the  city  and  the 
sanctuary,  and  the  end  thereof  shall  be  with 
a  flood;  rather,  "  and  the  people  of  a  prince.f 
who  shsill  come  and  end  with  overflowing,!  shall 

•  [Keil's  interpreution  is  siibstantinlly  like  this  namely : 
*'  it  is  not  to  Him,  viz.,  that  which  he  must  have,  to  be  the 
J/iwAioc-A.'*] 

t  [On  the  contrary,  n^3]  is  here  rendered  definite  by  the 

epithet  or  adjective  following,  and  therefore  may  properly  be 
translated  "the  prince."  It  simply  "omits  tlie  article  be- 
car.ee  it  is  different  from  that  in  ver.  25,  and  the  article 
would  give  a  wrong  sense,  or  at  least  the  insertion  of  it 
would  make  it  dubious  to  the  reader,  inasmuch  as  it  would 
naturally  refer  him  to  the  T*a:  in  ver.  26.  The  T^3^ 
here  is  merely  a  heathen  prince  acting  in  a  civil  (rather 
militury)  capacity,  in  distinction  from  a  n^'t^TS  who  be- 
longs to  the  people  of  God."— .*^/;/aj'/]. 
t  [This  rendering  of  r]I3!iJ3  *^22p^  is  quite  unjustifiable. 

It  is  not   a   correlative    douse    ajtpeiided    to   JtSn  as  a 


destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary."  The  words 
evidently  refer  to  a  catastrophe  which  follows 
immediately  on  the  cutting  off  of  the  anointed 
one.  The  "coming  prince"  (S<3'"!  1^3:)  who 
approaches  to  cause  destruction  to  the  city  and 
the  sanctuary,  or  more  exactly,  who  comes  aa 
the  ruler  of  the  people  that  brings  ruin  and  de- 
struction, is  doubtless,  therefore,  the  Old. -Test 
antichrist,  or  the  antitheistic  horn  of  the  earlier 
visions  (chap.  vii.  21,  25  ;  viii.  11  et  seq.  ;  24  et 
seq.),  and  consequently  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
Stan  (=!tia'^  "??*)  describes  this  ruler  as  com- 
ing at  the  head  of  his  army  in  a  Jiostile  character 
(cf.  v<13  in  i.  1 ;  viii.  G;  xi.  10,  13,  15,  16,  40, 
41),  and  the  deiinite  article  indicates  that  his 
coming  was  a  familiar  fact  to  the  prophet,  as 
having  formed  the  subject  of  his  earlier  predic- 
tions. *  The  participle  is  therefore  not  employed 
without  a  purpose  (Hofmann,  Weiss,  und  Erf., 
I.  304),  nor  does  it  refer  to  DP,  "people" 
(SchoU,  Ebrard).  It  does  not  signify  Epiphanes' 
"succession"  to  his  predecessor  Seleucus 
(Roesch,  Maurer),  nor  denote  the  future  "ap- 
pearing" or  mysterious  presence  of  the  New- 
Test,  antichrist,  in  the  sense  of  2  Thess,  ii.  9  (Klie- 
foth).— The  ending  of  this  prince  "  with  over- 
flowing "  is  probably  not  materially  different 
from  the  "  pouring  out  of  annihilation  and 
judicial  punishment  upon  the  desolator,"  at  the 
close  of  the  following  verse.  'I??,  "a  flood, 
an  overflowing,"  accordingly  denotes  the  judg- 
ment inflicted  Og  God  in  his  anger  ou  the  impious 
1^33  (Wieseler,  Kliefoth),  or,  more  probably, 
since  in  that  case  a  genitive  ^IX  (cf.  Prov.  xxvii. 
4)  would  properly  be  required  in  order  to  define 
the  sense  more  clearly,  it  is  used  sensu  belUco  to 
denote  an  overflowing  with  warlike  hosts,  which 
should  lead  to  the  end  of  his  life,  i.e.,  his  anni- 
hilation (chap.  xi.  45;  cf.  vii.  20).  Cf.  the  ex- 
actly similar  use  of  'IV'?  in  chap.  xi.  10.  22,  20, 
40,  and  in  Isa.  viii.  8,  together  with  C|0^2i 
np~S  Isa.  X.  22. — Here  again  we  are  obliged  to 
reject  a  number  of  diverging  explanations,  and 

further  definition  of  the  "T^a^,  but  an  imlepeudent  state 
ment  as  to  the  result  of  that  prince's  coming.  The  suffirt  in 
iSp  doubtless  refers  to  the  1^3r,  but  in  an  objective  not  a 

subjective  sense :  it  is  the  end  xchkh  he  caxtue^,  not  any 
which  he  is  to  suffer.  It  is  thus  precisely  parallel  with  the 
yp  of  the  clause  immediately  follo\ving.  Tliis  view  is  con- 
firmed by  the  article  in  C|t2S3,  w-hich  commentators  have 

overlooked  or  misapplied,  but  which  is  here,  as  often,  equi- 
valent (like  the  Greek  article)  to  a  personal  pronoun,  q.d. 
**  in  his  oversowing,"  evidently  the  military  campaign  or 
n^nb^  immediately  subjoined.    The  whole  phrase  thus 

indicates  that  the  invasion  should  issue  in  the  destruction  of 
Jerus.ilem.  This  was  certainly  not  done  by  Anticchua 
Epiphanes.] 

•  [The  inconsistency  of  this  explanation  of  the  article 
after  the  above  statement  that  it3n  =  5513"^  ^tr;5<  is  obvi- 
ous. It  is  not  a  Hebrew  idiom  to  use  the  article  with  a,  par- 
ticiple or  adjertive  in  order  to  point  out  something  well 
known ;  for  that  purpose  the  article  should  (also)  be  prefixed 
t^i  the  associiited  nntiti.  It  is  evidently  employed  here  sim- 
ply in    order  to   render   definite    the  othermse  indefinit* 

n"33,  i.e.,  ho  is  nov  a  present  or  a  past,  but  ft  futvft 
prince.] 


202 


THE  PROPHET  DAXIEL. 


especially  that  of  Hitzig,  v.  Lengerke,  etc.,  who 
refer  the  words  to  a  warlike  expedition  under- 
taken bv  Autiochus  Epiphanes,   instead  of  one 
that  should  break  in  upon  him  like  a  flood  and 
annihilate   him ;    that  of   Ewald,   who  obtains 
the  sense  "who  comes  with  his  host  overflow- 
ing" (or  "in  overflow")  by  a  violent  emenda- 
tion,  inasmuch  as  he  substitutes  ^v'D?,   "and 
his  host,"  or  isni,  -'and  his  line  of  battle" 
(after  Prov.  xxx.  27),  for  iSpl;  that  of  Gese- 
nius,  Rosenmiiller,  Roesch,  etc.,  who  take  Cl^'i^? 
in  the  sense  of  "suddenly,  like  a  flood  ; "  that 
of  Auberlen,  Hiivernick,  Delitzsch,  etc.,  who  re- 
fer the  suifix  in  T^p_  to  the  city  and  sanctuary, 
rather  than  to  the  "prince;"   "their  destruc- 
tion shall   come   by  overflowing,"   etc.* — And 
unto  the  end  of  the  war  desolations  are  deter- 
mined ;  i.e..  the  devastating  of   the   city  and 
sanctuary  are  to  continue  to  the  end  of  the  war- 
like alarms  excited  by  their  impious  oppressor, 
as  a  matter  that  is  determined  by  God.     "OniQ 
designates  that  state  of  war  which  begins  with 
cutting  off  the  anointed  one,  and  eventually  re- 
sults in  the  destruction  of  the  city  and  the  sanc- 
"  tuary   (so,    correctly,    RosenmliUer,    Hofmann, 
Ewaid,  Fiiller,  etc.).     Others  read,  "  and  to  the 
end  shall  be  war,  the  determined  desolations," 
in  which  method  Ti^"'.::  "-^I^l  is  cither  taken 
as  an   apposition   (Havem. ,   v.    Leng. ,  Maur., 
Wieseler,  Hitz. ,  Auberlen),  or  as  an  explanatory 
clause  to  the  foregoing,  with   the  conjunctions 
omitted  in  the  connection  (Kranichfeld,    Klie- 
foth),  and  in  connection  with  which  still  further 
differences  of  opinion  exist  with  regard  to  the 
meaning  of  TP.,  some  expositors  referring  it  to 
the  end  of  the  prince   (Wieseler),  some  to  the 
end   of  the  sanctuary   (Hiiv.,    Aub.)   or  of   the 
period  of  the  seventy  weeks — hence,  to  the  last 
year-week  of  the  seventy  (v.  Lengerke,  Hitzig), 
and  some   even   to  the  end  of   all  things,   the 
"absolute  end"  (Kliefoth).     The  reference  of 
y^:^  to  the  exterminated  prince  is  evidently  the 
only  one  in  harmony  with  the  context,  which 
thus  identifies  it  with  the  ISp  of  the  preceding 
clause  ;  bnt  it  is  more  appropriate  to  regard  it 
in  the  sense  of  a  stat.  coiistr.,  "to  the  end  of 
the  war,"  because  of  the  more  regular  and  con- 
nected character  of    the  arrangement   of    the 
sentence.!    "?":'j;  is  also  the  construct  state  of 
ru"n-,  which  recurs  at  the  close  of  the  follow- 
ing verse,  and  here  probably  denotes  the  same 
idea  as  in  chap.  xi.  30,  and  Isa.  x.  23  ;   xxviii. 
22,  viz. :  "  determination,  destiny,  what  is  or- 
dained."    A  "  determination  of  the  desolations" 

*  [These  latter  interpretations  are  refuted  in  detail  by 
Keil.  whose  objection^,  however,  do  not  apply  to  tlie  cxpla- 
natinn-*  which  are  suf.'gc6ted  above.] 

t  (Keil  admits  the  grammatical  jiropriety  of  this  render- 
in:;,  but  objects  that  ' '  in  the  preceding  sentence  no  mention 
i-  expressly  made  of  war;  and  if  the  war  which  consisted 
in  the  destruction  of  the  city  be  meant,  n?3n2?p  ought  to 
have  the  article."  These  arguments  are  of  no  force,  as 
"'Cnb^  >s  definite  by  reason  of  its  construction  with  ^[l^' 
uid  the  war  Itaelf  was  already  distinctly  alluded  to  in  the 
tl==-l 


(niJa^a  as  in  v.  18 ;  cf.  on  that  passage)  is  a 
decree  that  aims  at  desolations  and  has  them 
for  its  object.  Ewald  :  "  the  decision  respect- 
ing the  horrors."  i.e.,  the  decision  of  God  at  the 
judgment  of  the  world,  which  relates  to  the 
horrible  actions  and  devastations  of  Autiochus,  oi 
which  serves  to  punish  them  (?).  Hofmann  and 
Kliefoth  are  still  more  arbitrary  :  "a  determined 
measure  of  desolations,  which  is  thus  limited 
and  confined."  — [This  language  was  not  fulfilled 
in  any  appropriate  sense  by  Antiochus,  who 
aimed  merely  at  the  suppression  of  Jehoyah's 
worship,  but  left  the  city  and  sanctuary  unin- 
jured. It  seems  to  us  that  the  old  interpretation, 
which  refers  it  to  the  last  war  with  the  Romans 
when  Titus  seemed  compelled  by  providence  to 
persist  in  his  attack  till  the  temple  itself  was 
demolished,  is  the  only  adequate  one.  This  was 
the  retribution  that  eventually  followed  the  re- 
jection and  murder  of  their  Messiah  by  the 
Jews.  ] 

Verse  27.  And  he  shall  confirni  the  cove- 
nant with  many  for  one  week  ;  rather,  "make 
a  strong  covenant."*  etc.  This  sentence  (intro- 
duced by  an  explicative  ror)  is  obviously  an 
explanation  and  more  particvilar  illustration  of 
the  statements  in  the  preceding  verse.  Its  sub- 
ject is  neither  the  indefinite  "it"  (Fuller),  nor 
the  "one  week"  (Theodot.,  Dereser,  Hiivern., 
Von  Leng.,  Hengstenb.,  Hitz.,  Auberl.),  but, 
beyond  all  question,  T'j;,  which  governs  the 
preceding  sentence  as  a  logical  subject,  is  finally 
included  in  isp.,  and  is  the  prominent  subject 
of  consideration,  from  v.  26  *  (thus,  correctly. 
Berth.,  Maur.,  Wiesel.,  Ewald,  Kranichf.,  Klief., 
etc.).  j  It  is  observed,  therefore,  with  regard 
to  the  anti-Christian  prince  of  the  final  world- 
power,  that  "  he  shall  confinn  the  covenant  as 
to  many,"  i.e.,  "that  he  shaU  enter  into  a 
strong,  firm  covenant  with  many ; "  for  the 
Hiphil  ^^33"^  which  occurs  elsewhere  only  in 
Psa.  xii.  5,  and  there  signifies  "  to  be  strong,  to 
exhibit  strength,"  in  this  pliice  doubtless  ex- 
presses the  transitive  idea  of  strengthening,  and 
in  connection  with  the  idea  "covenant,"  involves 
more  particularly  the  notion  of  "confirming  or 
establishing."  The  many  (^-^a-i  with  the  arti- 
cle) with  whom  the  strong  covenant  is  made  by 
the  jirince  are  obviously  the  numerous  apostate 
Jews,  who  were  induced  by  the  heathen  tyrant 
to  break  their  covenant  with  God  and  disobey 
His  law.  according  to  1  Mace.  i.  10  et  seq.,  and 
thus  to  enter  into  an  antitheocratic  alliance  that 
was  bostQe  to  God, /f/'  one  letek;  i.e.,  during  a 


*  (The  connection  is  onnecessary.  The  expres.sion 
r^13  ■■'a^m  properly  and  fairly  signifies:  "he  shall 
confirm  a  covenant,"  which  naturally  implies  one  already 
mndo  1 

t  [On  the  contrary  it  seems  to  ns  that  the  subject  of  this 

clause  is  not  the  -^32  just  spoken  of,  bnt  the  n"'r^ 
T"31  preceding,  or,  more  definitely,  the  n'^'^tt  jnet  bo- 
fore  ;  for  (1)  this  (as  Hengstenberg  rightly  says)  is  the  pre- 
dominant or  principal  subject  of  the  entire  passage ;  and 
(■i)  each  of  the  other  portions  of  the  seventy  wciics  ia 
directly  referred  to  that  personnge,  so  that  this  final  week 
will  not  fill  up  the  number  appropriately  if  olhcrwiso  re- 
ferred. The  objections  of  Keil  to  this  intenTetation  are 
unimportant.  Moreover,  the  prophecy  is  not  hist.iricallj 
applicable  to  Antiochus,  but  does  correspond  to  the  term  of 
the  Messiah's  ministry  ;  as  we  shall  endeavor  to  show.] 


CHAP.  IX   1-27. 


2^3 


oreek  of  rears  {"^  "•?,  accusative  of  time).  Cf . 
the  allusion.?  to  thit  fact  in  chap.  xi.  32  (where 
f^"!^  is  employed  in  the  same  antitheocratic 
Ben.se  as  here),  in  xi.  33  (where  the  transgressors 
of  [Jehovah's]  covenant,  the  "^"^3  ^?"''r"!'?,  are 
the  same  as  the  -^?~  in  this  place),  and  also  in 
chap,  viii.  10  et  seq.,  where  the  stars  that  were 
trodden  under  foot  by  the  little  horn  may  like- 
wise represent  the  breakers  of  the  covenant  who 
are  here  mentioned  (cf.  also  viii.  24  et  seq.).* — 
A  great  diversitj'  of  opinion  respecting  the 
meaning  of  the  "covenant"  exists  among  the 
representatives  of  the  theory  which  makes 
"ins  ^''-'il"  the  subject  of  "I'^Jn.  In  illustra- 
tion of  this.  cf.  Hitzig,  '"the  one  week  of  years 
shall  make  the  covenant — i.e..  the  adherence  to 
the  faith  in  Jehovah,  and  to  the  theocratic  law 
— ?tard  for  many  ;  "  Hofmann  (t<c/inflbewei.'i.  II. 
2),  "  the  one  week  of  years  shall  confirm  many 
in  the  covenant  through  tribulation  and  the 
trial  of  their  faith"  (similarly.  Rosenmuller, 
before  Hofmann);  Von  Leugerke,  '"A  week 
shall  confirm  a  covenant  to  many,  through  the 
seductive  arts  of  Antiochus ;  "  Hengstenberg, 
Havernick,  Auberlen,  etc.,  "the  one  week,  or 
rather  the  events  belonging  to  it,  especially  the 
death  of  the  Messiah  referred  to  in  v.  20,  will 
lead  to  the  conclusion  of  a  new,  strong,  and 
firm  covenant  with  m.iny,"  etc. — And  in  the 
midst  of  the  week  he  shall  cause  the  sacrifice 
and  the  oblation  to  cease  j  i.e. ,  during  one  half 
of  the  week.  y"I2T  "^T!  might  of  itself  sig- 
nify the  middle  of  the  week  ;  but  the  following 

"3"  ~r~  shows  that  something  transpires  dur- 
ing the  llJn  "^n,  which  naturally  belongs  to 
the  close  of  the  whole  period  of  oppression  here 
described,  viz. :  the  punishment  and  aiiuihil.a- 
tion  of  the  impious  persecutor.     For  this  reason 

CT  ''.Zrt  must  rather  denote  half  of  the  week, 
and  more  particularly  the  .second  half,  and  it 
therefore  corresponds  to  the  three  and  a  half 
years  of  persecution  of  chap.  vii.  25;  and  r''S"i"'^ 
— for  which  no  other  appropriate  subject  can  be 
found  than  that  of  the  preceding  verb  ~"??7 — 
can  therefore  express  no  other  sense  than  that 
of  '"causing  to  cease"  during  the  period  in 
question.  The  impious  madman  causes  to  cease 
during  that  period  the  ■^"-'r'  l^?!.  the  bloody 
and  unbloody  offerings,  which  are  mentioned 
representatively  for  idl  the  sacrifices  required  by 
the  theocratic  ritual,  as  being  the  two  principal 
classes  of  offerings  under  the  Mosaic  economy, 

*  [T)ic  passages  adduceil  by  the  tiuthor,  especially  xi.  22, 
do  not  sustain  the  meaning  he  here  assigns  to  ri'^"^S,  which, 

unless  specially  qualified,  always  refers  to  Jehovah's  cove- 
nant as  contained  in  the  Law.  Moreover,  as  Keil  justly 
observes,  '*3''3^b-  with  the  article,  signifies  the  many. 

i.e..  the  great  mass  of  the  people  in  contrast  ^vith  the  few.'' 
But  the  ma.ss  of  the  Jews  did  not  apostatize  in  the  time  of 
Anliochns.  Still  more  inept  is  Keil  s  application:  "That 
nngodly  piince  shall  impose  (m  the  mass  of  the  people  a 
Ftrong  covenant  that  they  should  follow  him  and  trivc  them- 
gelves  to  him  as  their  Gnd."  The  languaee  of  the  text  can 
only  have  its  appropriate  fulfilment  in  the  mission  of  the 
Redeemer,  which  was  a  '■onil>letion  of  God's  covenant  with 
the  race  of  man.  How  this  took  place  during  the  last  of  the 
•evcuty  w  ceks  we  will  presently  show.] 


I  in  a  similar  manner  as  that  in  which  T'ttr". 
"  the  daily,"  was  employed  in  chap.  viii.  11  to 
express  this  concrete  individualizing  and  com- 
prehensive .sense.*  The  expression  here  em- 
ployed cannot  be  taken  to  refer  to  the  supersed- 
ing of  the  Old-Test,  institution  of  sacrifices  by 
the  New-Test,  worship  iu  spirit  and  in  truth,  as 
being  based  on  the  perfect  expiatory  sacrifice  of 
Christ  (against  Hiivernick,  Hengstenb. ,  Auberl., 
etc.) ;  for  the  verb  7";-.rn  would  not  have  been 
.  suited  to  express  that  idea,  and,  moreover,  the 
i  .nil  offering  (cf.  v.  H)  would  hardly  have  been 
passed  by  without  mention  in  that  case.  Klie- 
foth  emphasizes  correctly,  "  that  in  this  place 
the  1^3^  of  V.  26  mu.st  be  considered  the  sub- 
ject, and  that  the  observation  here  relates  not 
to  the  abrogation,  but  merely  to  the  suspension 
of  the  sacrifices ;  "  but  he  afterward  arbitrarily 
applies  the  passage  to  a  temporary  suspension 
.and  suppression  of  the  eucharist  as  the  sacrifice 
of  the  New  Covenant,  to  be  caused  by  the  anti- 
christ in  the  last  age  of  the  church. — And  for 
ihe  overspreading  of  abominations  he  shaU 
make  it  desolate;  rather,  "and  abominations 
of  desolation  shall  be  on  the  wing."  This 
;^rp  S"2^pZ  C):s  i";''  constitutes  the  actual 
climax  of  the  many  difiiculties  presented  in  this 
passage,  the  real  crtix  inteiyritiim.  which  has 
produced  almost  as  many  explanations  as  inter- 
preters. Probably  all  those  methods  of  expla- 
nation are  to  be  at  once  rejected  and  avoided 
which  contradict  the  most  ancient  quotation 
and  tran.slation  of  the  words  in  the  originally 
Hebrew  Maccabiean  book  (chap.  i.  :>i  ;  cf.  Matt, 
xxiv.  1.5  :  Mark  xiii.  14).  and  the  corresponding 
testimony  of  the  most  ancient  translators,  the 
Sept.,  Theodotion,  and  the  Vulg.ate.  All  these 
render  -J?"^"^  CijT^p'i:  by  "abominations  of 
desolation"  (1  Mace,  1.  c,  to  jiiiXvyiia  ri/r 
ilij/iii.inf:(.)r  -^  Sept.,  Theodot..,  Sf^iAv}/iia  Tuv  eptmu- 
nn.ir  ,'  Vulg.,  (ihomiiiiitio  de.wlaUonis).  which 
probably  resulted  from  the  influence  of  priuii- 
tive  traditions  that  were  certainly  correct  in  the 
main.  -^".2';  was  accordingly  regarded  as  a 
genitive  from  the  beginning,  and  probably  by 
the  author  himself— not,  however,  as  a  genitive 
of  possession,  but  as  a  genitive  of  description  ; 
or,  what  amounts  to  the  same  thing,  it  was  con- 
sidered an  ajypositioii  to  the  preceding  plural 
C^S^iJ",  in  support  of  which  the  analogy  of 
'2~»  r^tin  in  chap.  viii.  8  may  be  adduced  on 
the  one  hand  (as  also  the  similar  coimection  of 
that  plural  with  a  singular  in  Jer.  xlix.  11),  and 
on  the  other,  the  appositional  combination 
c;^-?3  flpSJ"  in  chap.   vui.  13   (cf.  also  1~Sn 

*  [Or,  on  the  usual  Messianic  interpretjition,  Christ  shall 
forever  do  away  with  the  Levitical  sacrifices  by  the  one  per- 
fect offering  of  himself  (Heb.  vii.  27;  i.\.  I'i-lJ,  26).  On 
this  view,  it  matters  little  whether  we  render  "'^n  ''  in  the 

midst,''  or  "during  half."  for  ourLord's  ministry  was  a  pro- 
cess of  snpersedure  of  the  legal  sacrifices,  which  culminated 
in  his  death,  and  ( should  we  even  er;mt  the  author's  posi- 
tion, that  the  latter  hti.M  of  the  week  is  Intended)  was  finally 
carried  ont  by  the  release  of  Gentiles  fr  iin  the  Lcviiical 
economy  (Acts  xi.  18).  The  author's  objections,  as  to  the 
sense  of  Ti^^SCri,  etc.,  are  inconclusive.     Stuart  thinks 

that  "chap,  vii,  11  settles  the  que  tion  "  that  Antiochus  ij 
i  referred  to ;  but  the  language  there  employed  is  veiy  dlil«r- 
ent.] 


204 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL 


CH-,  1  Chron.  xxvii.  5).*  The  plural  Ci^lplD 
(for  which,  however,  the  writer  of  1  Mace.,  1.  c, 
substituted  the  sing.  f^Pr,  p&iAvyua,  possibly 
with  design,  because  the  abomination  of  idola- 
try with  which  Epiphanes  desecrated  the  temple 
was  chief  in  his  mind)  at  all  events  denotes 
"  abominations,  horrible  things,"  and  more  par- 
ticularly abominable  things  from  a  religiuus 
point  of  view,  abominable  idolatries,  what  is 
loathsome  in  the  domain  of  Divine  worship, 
'■  ren  abemiinanda  od  cultuyn  Deorinti  spectantes  ;" 
cf.  xi.  31  ;  xii.  11.  In  like  manner  as  this 
meaning  of  C^ljlpa  is  adequately  secured  by 
the  ,iii£/.i'j,ua  or  abomiiiatio  of  the  ancient  trans- 
lators, so  that  of  cacfi,  by  which  it  denotes 
"  ravager  or  desolation,"  is  evidently  established 
by  their  Ipijiujaic.  This  rendering  may  be  sub- 
stantiated by  a  comparison  with  ritt^O  in  the 
preceding  verse,  and  also  with  rii'Sn  in  Ezek. 
xxxvi.  3  (cf.  C?3'r,  "  to  be  desolate,  uninhab- 
ited," Lam.  i.  4 ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  20),  and  accords 
as  well  with  the  context  as  does  the  idea  of  an 
"object  to  be  stared  at,  or  of  terror" — hence 
"what  is  terrible,  dreadful," — by  which  Hitzig, 
Evvald,  el  al. ,  prefer  to  render  the  term  (by  vir- 
tue of  a  one-sided  application  of  the  fund,  mean- 
ing of  cau.".  "to  stare,  shudder").  If  these 
considerations  are  accordingly  sufficient  to  es- 
tablish for  cairtt  flp'd  the  sense  of  "abomin- 
ation of  desolation  "  =  "desolating abomination 
of  idolatry,  hideously  devastating  nature  of  the 
idolatrous  service,"  there  remains  only  the  diffi- 
cult ^133  bJ"!  to  be  interpreted.  The  ancient 
versions  are  agreed  in  rendering  ci^D  by  ispov^ 
tcmplum,  and  also  in  not  connecting  it  as  a  Stat, 
comtr.  with  the  following  term,  but  taking  it 
separately  as  a  slat,  absol,  and  reading  it  ^"2- 
It  might  be  difficult  to  raise  any  material  objec- 
tion against  this  departure  from  the  Masoret. 
punctuation,  since  it  is  only  too  easy  to  conceive 
of  p;3  as  astat.  coiutr.,  and  thus  reach  the  ordi- 
nary reading,  in  view  of  the  temptation  to 
obtain  the  sense  of  "wings  of  abomination, 
hideous  wings,"  which  is  suggested  by  passages 
like  Zech.  v.  1,  9.  Moreover,  the  interpretation 
of  Ct^S  by  "  sanctuary"  has  an  almost  irresisti- 
ble though  indirect  support  in  the  irrcpvyiov  roi' 
if/j'/)  of  Slatt.  iv.  .1.  q::,  in  itself  equivalent  to 
"screen,  covering,  roof"  (from  which  fund, 
meaning  all  others,  e.y.,  wing,  tassel,  edge,  bor- 
der, etc.,  are  readily  derived),  might  without 
difficulty  become  the  customary  term  to  desig- 
nate tits  roof  of  the  temple  or  the  "  pinnacle  of 


*  [The  author's  construction  of  the  words  in  question, 
although  sanctioned  by  such  eiirly  authority,  is  wholly  un- 
gnimmatical.  There  is  but  one  translation  possible ;  On  a 
wing  of  nbomtnattonst  shall  be  a  dehotator.  The  t]:2  aptly 
designates  the  eagles  of  the  Iloman  army,  which  were  used 
as  idolatrous  inmpes :  and  tlio  •'  dcsolator,"  which  was 
**over''  them,  of  course,  is  the  army  itself  or  the  comman- 
der. This  is  in  pointed  agreement  with  our  Lord's  warning. 
Matt.  xxiv.  \:i ;  which,  of  course,  must  be  regarded  as  a  cita- 
tion of  this  passage  from  the  Sept.,  as  mihHtinitiaUi/  agree- 
ing with  its  sense.  I'he  fact  that  the  destruction  of  the 
city  and  temple  by  Titus  did  not  immediately  follow  the 
Crudflxion  is  uo  objection  to  this  interpretation  of  the 
clause,  which  is  altogether  parallel,  both  in  import  and 
phrVMOlogy.  with  the  dise  of  the  preceding  verse.] 


the  temple"  (Matt.,  1.  c.),  and  afterward  be 
applied,  with  equal  adaptation,  to  the  entir( 
edifice  of  the  temple  (in  view  of  its  elevated  site 
and  its  prominent  buildings),  by  virtue  of  a 
synecdoche  analogous  to  that  which  prevails  in 
the  Latin  with  reference  to  tectum,  and  in  the 
Greek  (cf.  Matt.  viii.  8)  in  the  use  of  "rt-jti.  If 
this  view  should  not  seem  objectionable,  it  will 
not  be  necessary  to  limit  the  sense  of  q;;  so  as 
to  apply  to  the  roof -pinnacle,  summit,  or  high- 
est point  of  the  temple  (Gesenius,  HengsteD 
berg,  etc.),  nor  yet  to  -violently  amend  C):3  bj" 
by  supplying  bj'inD^,  with  J.  D.  Michaelis.  I* 
will  then  be  possible  to  render  it  simply  by, ' '  and 
on  the  -wing,  i.  e. ,  the  temple, "  and  to  regard  the 
"  desolating  idolatrous  abominations  found  on  it 
as  any  symbols  or  utensils  of  idolatrous  worship 
-whatever,  whether  idols,  altars  erected  to  their 
worship,  or  other  similar  fixtures.  See  espe- 
cially Bleek,  Jahrb.  f.  d.  Theol,  1860.  p.  93  et 
seq.  *  —  We  adduce,  by  way  of  illustration 
merely,  several  of  the  more  recent  and  notice- 
able of  the  many  interpretations  rejected  in 
favor  of  the  above  (with  reference  to  which 
Hitzig,  p.  168,  observes  somewhat  coarsely,  but 
not  without  wit,  and,  were  he  to  assign  to  his 
own  a  principal  place  among  them,  not  incor- 
rectly, that  "the  expositors  themselves  are  here 
lying-in  in  the  weeks,  and  being  delivered  of  all 
manner  of  -^^^pX' ").  Hitzig  interprets,  "and 
annihilation,  even  to  its  full  consummation,  is 
poured  out  on  the  extreme  point  of  the  horrible 
abomination "  (by  which  expression  is  desig- 
nated the  idolatrous  altar,  which,  according  to 
1  Mace.  i.  .59,  was  erected  on  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offerings  by  Antiochus)  ;  Ewald,  "  and  above 
shall  be  the  horrible  wing  of  abominations,"  i.e., 
"the  wing-shaped  (!  ?)  point  of  the  heathen 
altar  shall  appear  over"  the  ruined  altar  of 
Jehovah  ;  Wieseler,  "  and  a  desolator  shall  arise 
against  the  wing  of  abominations ;  "  Von  Len- 
gerke,  "the  desolator  comes  upon  the  pinnacle 
of  abomination "  (also  Hengstenberg.  Maurer, 
Reinke) ;  de  Wette,  "the  abomination  of  the 
desolator  shall  stand  on  the  pinnacle  of  the  tem- 
ple ;  ".  Hiivernick,  "  on  the  head  (or  summit)  of 
the  abominations  is  a  desolator  ;  "  Auberlen, 
'  •  and  because  of  the  desolating  wing  of  abom- 
inations ....  the  curse  (?)  shall  drop  down 
upon  the  desolate;"  Delitzsch,  "and  indeed, 
because  of  the  desolating  wing  of  abominations 
(which  .spreads  over  the  temple  and  the  altar), 
the  sacrifice  shall  be  abolished ;  "  Hofmann, 
"  and  upon  the  covering  of  the  desolating  idola- 
trous institutions  (i.e.,  on  the  new  plate  which 
Antiochus  caused  to  be  placed  on  the  profaned 
altar  with  a  -view  to  the  offering  of  heathen 
sacrifices)  the  sacrifice  shall  be  interrupted  for 
half  a  week ;  "  FiiUer,  "and  over  the  covering 
of  abominations  stands  a  desolator  ; "  Ebrard, 

•  [Blcek,  in  the  passage  here  cited,  shows,  as  Keil  well 
argues,  that  qi5  is  "used  only  of  that  which  is  extended 
horizontally  (for  end  or  extremity),  but  never  of  that  which 
is  extended  perjtendicnlarly  {for  peak)."  Nor,  as  Keil  con- 
tinues, can  the  use  of  it  in  the  latter  sense  be  (-roved  ficm 
the  mtpvyiov  of  Matt.  iv.  .5:  Luke  iv.  9:  for  the  genitive 
ToO  ifpoy.  not  I'ooii.  shows  that  not  a  pinnacle  or  summit  of 
the  temple  edifice  itself  is  meant,  but  a  wing  or  adjoining 
bnililing  of  the  sanctuary.  To  the  latter  alone,  indeed 
coulil  access  have  been  liad  by  our  Lord  on  the  occasioi 
referred  to.  I 


CHAP.   IX.   1-27. 


205 


Cliefoth,  "and  a  destroyer  comes  on  the  wings 
of  idolatrous  abominations  "  (so  formerly  Reich- 
el.  Stud.  V.  Kritiktii.  1848,  and  also  Kranich- 
feld  [and  substantially  Keil]) ;  Jahn,  Ilcrmencu- 
tic.  Append.,  p.  101),  {Tesenius(7'//«<(/«;'.). '"deso- 
lation comes  upon  the  horrible  wing  of  the 
rebel's  host ;  "  [Stuart.  "  and  a  waster  shall  be 
over  a  winged  fowl  of  abominations,"'  i.e.,  the 
winged  statue  of  Jupiter  Olympius  placed  by 
Antiochus  in  the  temple],  etc. — Even  until 
the  consummation,  and  that  determined  shall 
be  poured  upon  the  desolate;  rather,  "but 
(only)  until  extirpation  and  judicial  punishment 
shall  be  poured  out  upon  the  desolator,"  i.e.,  the 
abomination  of  desolation  shall  continue  only 
nntil  the  Divinely  determined  judgment  shall  be 
poured  out  upon  the  desolator.  The  i  in  "IST 
may  be  rendered  by  "  and  indeed"  (as  -\  epexe- 
gelicmii),  or  by  "  but  yet ;  "  in  either  case  this 
closing  sentence  serves  to  limit  the  idea.  It 
points  out,  in  a  comforting  manner,  how  long 
the  abomination  of  desolation  should  continue 
in  the  sanctuary,  certifying  that  it  could  be 
maintained  no  longer  than  the  providence  of 
God  should  permit.*  "The  thought  that  the 
events  of  the  entire  period  of  severe  tribulation 
in  question  are  controlled  by  a  Divine  decree 
which  predetermines  their  end  and  results  was 
already  expressed  for  the  comfort  of  the  pious 
in  the  niKSis  n-i^n:  of  v.  20,  and  was  also 
implied  by  "Pn;,  v.  24"  (Kranichfeld).  The 
combination  "^"n^l  '"'??  is  taken  verbatim 
from  Isa.  x.  23  ;  xxviii.  22,  and  signifies,  as  in 
those  passages.  "  utter  extinction  (annihilation) 
and  consummation," — a  heudiadys  which  de- 
notes a  "  Divinely  determined  annihilation, 
extirpation  imposed  as  a  judicial  punishment." 
This  two-fold  idea  forms  a  unit  in  the  intimate 
blending  of  its  shades  of  meaning,  and  is  the 
subject  of  the  verb  "^Pri  ;  for  1>  is  not  in  this 
in.stance  a  preposition  governing  the  two  sub- 
stantives, but  a  conjunction,  signifying  "  until 
that,"  as  elsewhere  "1^?  '?  I  cf.  Gen.  xxxviii. 
11  ;  Hos.  X.  12.  The  annihilation  that  was 
determined  "drops  down,  is  poured  out"  on 
the  -*?-,'  the  impious  desolator,  as  the  curse 
and  the  oath  were  to  descend  upon  the  guilty 
Israelites,    v.    11  ;    cf.     P"'.?,    which   does   not 

materially  differ  from  ''^^~n.:l  '""^ri  **  ^^^  ^' 
ready  been  shown.— BKin,  the  Kal  participle  of 
D":™'.  is  probably  equivalent  in  substance  to 
55™^,  the  Piel  partic.  of  the  same  verb  (cf. 
chap.  viii.  13;  xii.  11  with  chap.  xi.  31).f  Like 
th.it,  it  signifies  "desolating,  the  desolating 
(agent),  desolation,"  and  probably  does  not  pri- 

*  [Rather,  it  shows  that  the  abominable  object  should 
remain  even  tilt  the  complete  desolation.  Keil'a  objection 
to  the  use  of  nJ")  as  a  conjunction,  that  '•  though   ~7  is 

so  used,  1>1  is  not,"  has  little  force.] 

t  (Such  a  confusion  of  Kal  and  Piel  is  quite  unauthor- 
ized.     S?212  must  here,  as  everywhere  else,  be  treated  as 

passive,  dexolate.     It  is  certainly  parallel  with  Tl'D'S'^tS 

of  the  preceding  verse,  as  the  conuectiou  with  ,"I2"in3  in 
both  ilistance:^  sh  twa.] 


marily  designate  the  person  of  the  antichrist, 
but  rather  both  antichrist  and  his  host  (cf.  v. 
20.  "the  people  of  a  prince')  —  hence,  the 
aggregate  of  the  power  that  opposed  God  led 
Israel  into  aposta.sy  and  desecrated  its  sanctu- 
ary, and  upon  which  the  Divine  judgment  was 
for  that  reason  poured  out.  Hitzig  arbitrarily 
^  remarks  (as  did  Ewald  and  Hofmann  before 
him)  that  -tt",r  does  not  designate  the  tyrant 
who  resisted  God,  but  rather  the  idol-altar 
erected  by  him  or  the  heathen  religion  gener- 
ally, against  which  destruction  and  judgment 
are  here  denounced,  as  being  horrible  to  any 
Israelite  in  its  nature. 

APPENDIX 

Belating  to  the  history  of  tlie  eocpoiition  of  vb. 
24^27. 

I 
1 .  Jewish  exposition  in  pre-  Christian  times  ia 
united  in  referring  this  section  to  the  Maccabje- 
an  ajra  of  tribulation  under  Antiochus  Epiphanes.' 
This  is  established  beyond  controversy  by  the 
iiiW/.vyua  epoiKJaeur  of  1  Mace.  i.  ,54,  which  cor- 
responds to  0'5~'Q  ai^lp".!",  V.  27.  and  in  that 
place  denotes  the  smaller  idol-altar  (fiuudf,  v.  59) 
erected  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  on  the  altar  of 
burnt-offerings.  It  is  no  less  clearly  indicated 
by  the  maimer  in  which  the  Sept.  renders  this 
paragraph,  and  supplements  it  with  vaiious  ad- 
ditions that  obviously  relate  to  the  Maccabaean 
period.  In  this  connection  the  mode  of  express- 
ing the  time  indicated  at  the  beginning  of  v.  26 
is  especially  instructive.  •  •  And  after  threescore 
and  two  weeks,"  reads  in  that  version, ' '  inrn  i-ra 
Kai  eiidntiijKovra  Kal  f^i/Kuvra  th'o,"  i.e.,  after  1.39 
(67  +  02)  yeari^  This  was  doubtless  intended 
to  designate  the  year  139  of  the  a;ra  ot  the 
SeleucidEB  (B.C.  174)  as  the  time  at  which  began, 
the  apostasy  of  the  Jews  who  had  been  seduced 
by  Antiochus  ;  cf.  1  Maco.  i.  11  et  seq. ;  2  Mace, 
iv.  9  et  seq.  See  also  Wieseler,  Lie  70  ^Vnrhen, 
etc.,  p.  201;  Havernick,  Komnnnt.,  p.  387  et 
seq. — Several  expressions  in  the  New  Test, 
appear  to  Indicate  that  shortly  before  the  advent 
of  Christ  the  Jews  again  began  to  look  for  the 
fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  in  question  in  tlie 
future ;  e.g.,  Luke  ii,  38  (cf.  v.  24),  -iioci'icxiiuti'oi 
'/ I'TfiGinii'  'lefH^rnn'/ifii ;  Matt,  xi,  3,  o  iffxuinrnr,  ^ 
designation  of  the  Messiah  that  probably  origin- 
ated in  a  misunderstanding  of  SS~  in  v.  26  (cf. 
Wieseler,  p.  150)  ;  and  also  the  allusions  to  the 
"  abomination  of  desolation,"  v.  27,  contained 
in  the  eschatological  prophecies  uttered  by  the 
Saviour  (Matt.  xxiv.  10  ;  M.ark  xiii.  14)  and  by 
St.  Paul  (2  Thess.  ii.  3  et  seq.),  which  could 
only  be  understood  by  their  contemporaries,  in 
case  a  Messianic  character  were  assigned  to  the 
paragraph  before  us,  and  consequently,  in  case 
its  fulfilment  were  not  exclusively  looked  for  in 
the  events  of  the  Maccabaean  period.  *--Jose- 

*  Cf.  the  observation  of  Meliincthon  on  the  pas-sape, 
which  is  certjiinly  not  incorrect  upon  the  whole  (p.  Sfti) ; 
^^AcJudmU  quidem' post  luinielein  /acilUi  fitic  obnei-vatio 
aintorum,  prttserltm  qvum  in  en  popitlo  Mtrertiotet  tempora 
diliqenttfr  ttnnoutreni  et  ntnlct  eJt'^ent  loiKjcpvi.  Nehemian, 
qui  Danielein  senern  videt-at  fidiiU^ceii.^,  Alejrft/tdritm  seiiea 
vidil  ^y)  ....  ^ituc'tn  qui  CltfiatUJH  infitiitem  ife\fa- 
vitins-inn,  vidit  tldntenceuit  senex,  qui  3la"-'(lnKtnn  riilciatlt. 
Talef  Biri  tempt/re,  quo  ChriHtu.i  nntiin  e-\t,  iutetlt^xenint,  an. 
twn  hie  priTjlnitoH  exaete  Quadrare  ad  Chri-^ti  udveiitum^^ 


206 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


phuB  also  bears  witness  that  this  Messianic-es- 
chatological  inteqjretation  was  current  among 
the  Jews  of  his  day.  in  the  repeated  instances 
where  he  states,  or  at  least  implies,  that  the 
terrible  incidents  connected  with  the  Jewish 
war  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the 
Romans  were  predicted  by  the  prophet  Daniel ; 
e.g., Ant..  X.  11.  7  :  '-Daniel  also  wrote  concern- 
ing the  Roman  government,  and  that  our  coun- 
try should  be  made  desolate  by  them  (o"'  i-' 
avTu^  'ui/fiu-dyae-ai);  "  De  Bell.  Jud.,  IV.  5.  2, 
where  be  applies  the  term  '■  anointed  one,"  v. 
26,  and  again  the  expression  "anointed  one  and 


prince,"  v.  25,  to  the  high  priest  Aaanus  whom 
the  Idumjeaus  murdered ;  and  Vi' Belt  Jud-.V!. 
5,  4,  where  the  mysterious  oracle  "that  then 
should  their  city  be  taken,  when  their  temple 
should  become  four-square  "  seems  to  refer  back 
to  V.  27  (where  they  perhaps  read  J^-"J  instead 
of  5inC),  etc.  It  is  less  certain  whether  any 
direct  reference  to  this  section  is  contained  in  ; 
the  celebrated  passage,  I)e  BeU.  Jud. ,  VI. ,  5,  4,  wc 
Kara  rov  naipoi'  tKeifov  an-u  ri/c  ^upac  ti<;  aL'ri.ii' 
a/tict  rf/(  otKovtiii-r,(.  In  that  case  the  parallel 
records  in  Tacitus,  Hist.,  V.  13  and  Suet.,  Ve-ip., 
4,  must,  of  course,  be  likewise  rooted  in  the  pro- 
phecy of  Daniel  that  is  before  us.  Concerning 
this  question  see  HiiTemick,  p.  390,  who,  how-  j 
ever,  probably  finds  too  much  in  the  passage, 
since  he  refers  the  ai>;it  vin  olnovfiiv.  directly  to 
the  -l^?l  of  V.  25  and  26.* 

2.  The  interpretation  of  Josephus,  which  ap- 
plies the  prophecy  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem in  A.D.  70  and  to  Titus  as  the  S3~  -;i3:. 
V.  26,  seems  to  have  been  accepted,  with  scarcely 
an  exception,  by  the  later  Jeics  of  the  Talmudic 
;era  and  the  time  immediately  subsequent.    The 
principal  witness  to  this  fact  is  Jerome  (on  v. 
24  et  seq. ;    T.  K,  2  ed.  Vallars.,  p.  694).     The 
"  Hebraji"  of  his  day  calculated  the  490  years 
or  seventy  weeks  of  years  from  the  first  year  of 
Darius  or  B.C.  539  indeed,  but  none  the  less  as- 
signed their  conclusion  to  the  age  of  Jesus,  even 
finding  his  death  predicted  therein  (probably  in 
the  nill"?2  r~2";,  V.  26),   since  they  held  that 
"  non  erit  illius  imperium,  guod  putabat  se  re- 
demturnm  "  (as  it  should  be  read,  instead  of 
"  qiifxl  imtabant  se  reteiityros,"  which  is  a  later 
emendation).     They  also  found  a  prediction  of 
the  approach   of  the  Roman  army  under  Ves- 
pasian and  Titus,  in  the  same  place.     Several 
added  even  the  rising  under  Barcocheba  or  the 
three  years'  (three  and  a  half  years)  war  against 
Hadrian :  "  Nee  ignm-aimis,  quosdam  illorum  di- 
eere,  quod  una  hehdmwda.  de  quii.  scriptuin  e»t: 
confimiabit pactum  multis  hebdomada  una.  dinda- 
iur  VespaMano  et  Hadriano,  guod  juxta  huitonam 
Josep/d  Vespasianus  et  Titus  tribus  annis  et  sex 
meitsibus  pacem  cum  Judais  fer.criit t.   Tres  atttem 
anni  et  sex  menses  sub  Hadriano  suppiitantur, 
quando  Hieriisiilrm  oninino  subrersn  est.  et  Juda- 
onun  'jens  caterratim  cmsa,  itn  vt  Jnda-iB  qtwque 
finiius  peUerentur."—'Ihe  two  Gemaras  also  re- 
fer this  prophecy  to  the  war  against  Vespasian  ; 
the  Babylonian  in  Nasir,  c.  5 ;  San/iedr.,  c.  11, 
and  the  Jerusalem  in  Kelim.  c.  9  ;  and  several 

•  fit  is  iicrhaps  to  thcw  proijheciei'  I'f  Daniel  in  a  Beneral 
waj-  thot  Jostpluis  likewise  alliules  in  the  references  to  an 
ancient  prediction  that  the  city  nhniiW  be  destroyed  in  a 
tivU  war,  De  Hell.  Jiul.,  IV.  H,  :i ;  VI.,  2,  1.] 


Talmudic  and  Rabbinical  traditions  are  likewis* 
based  oi.  thai  interpretation,  e.f/..  that  the  Tar- 
guinist  had  neglected  to  translate  the  Hagio- 
grapha.  because  it  was  taught  in  them  that  '  ■  tht 
Messiah  should  be  cut  off"  (v.  26.     See  Light- 
foot,   J{»r.  Uebr.   ad  Luc.   xix.    11  ;  Schottgen, 
JInr.  Ilehr.,  p.  211)  ;  and  that  the  Jlessiah  actu 
ally  came  at  the   time  when  Jerusalem  was  de 
stroyed  and  the  temple  desolated,  but  as  a  suf- 
ferer and  in  disgnise  (Glassener,  D(  ganin .  Jud 
Mess.  p.  23  ss.  ;  Corrodi,  Krit.  Gesch.des  Chilias 
mtis,  I.  284  et  seq.).— It  was  reserved  for  the 
later  period   of   the   middle   ages   to  introduce 
several  new  and  more  independent  explanations 
beside  this  variously  modified  Messianic  inter- 
pretation of  the  prophecy  ;  e.g.,  by  referring  the 
~rT.  nira  to  Cyrus  (Saad.  Gaon.,  Rashi,  Jac- 
chiad  ),  or  to  Nehemiah  (Ibn-Ezrai  or  the  high- 
priest  Joshua  (Levib.-Gers. ).  Cf.  Mi.Uer,  Jnda- 
v)m,  pp.  321,  342  et  seq.  ;  Carpzov,  in  his  ed.  of 
Raymond   Martini's  Pugiofidei,  p.  233.— It  was 
customary  to  follow  the  Seder  01am  Rabba  in 
reckoning  the  seventy  weeks  from  the  first  de- 
struction of  the  temple  to  the  second  ;  see  Aben- 
dana,  in  the  Spicileg.  ad  Michl.  Jophi:  '■  Heb- 
domades  hce  sept,  sunt  septimante  aniiorum  quad- 
ringentorum  nonnginta,  iidemque  sine  dvbio  a 
d^astatione  primi  ad  demstationem  secundi  tern- 
pli,  quia  sept,  anni  fuei-e  aiptivitntis  Babyhnicee, 
et  quadringenti  nginti  anni.  quibus  futura  erit 
domiis  secunda  in  siructvra  sua  :  atque  sic  ma- 
jores  nostri  erposuere  in  Seder  Olam."    By  this 
method  of  reckoning,  the  "1^"  «'■??:,  v.  25,  is 
accordingly  made  to  apply  to  the  period  of  Jere- 
miah's prophecy   respecting  the  seventy  years' 
exile  or  to  the  year  B.C.  588.     Ibn-Ezra  alone 
departs  from  this  method,  by  referring  that  ex- 
pression concerning  the  going  forth  of  the  oracle 
(V.  23)  to  Daniel,  and  consequently  assigning  the 
beginning  of  the  4!)0  years  to  the  year  B.C.  53£ 
and  extending  the  first  seven  weeks  of  years  be- 
longing to  that  period,   to  Nehemiah.   the  re- 
storer of  the  temple,  or  to  the  twentieth  year 
of    Artaxerxes.     Concerning    these    Eabhinical 
methods  of  reckoning,  and  at  the  same  time, 
concerning  their  fundamental  incorrectness  and 
untenable  character  in  a  chronological  point  of 
view,  cf.  Chr.  B.  Michaelis.  Anuut.  nbermr.  III. 
320  et  seq.    Individual  Rabbins  in  modem  times 
were  convinced  of  the  incorrectness  of  this  usu- 
al anti-Messianic  interpretation,  as  appears  from 
the  noteworthy  expres.Kion  of  the  Venetian  chief- 
Rabbin  Simon  Luzzato.  concerning  this  passage, 
as  recorded  by  Wolf  in  the  BiUiuth.  Uebr.,  III. 
1228.     According  to  him,  "the  consequence  of 
a  too  extended  and  profound  investigation  on 
the  part  of  Jewish  scholars  would  be  that  they 
would  all  become  Christians ;  for  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  according  to  Daniel's  limitation  of 
the  time,  the  Messiah  must  have  aheady  ap- 
peared.    But  that  Jesus  was  the  true  Messiah 
he  felt  himself  unable  to  accept  as  certain."  _ 

3.  The  Christian  expositors  of  the  older  time 
regarded  the  directly  Messianic  bearing  of  the 
passage  as  being  generally  incontrovertible,  and 
especially  the  npplication  of  niu:^  r'S"  to 
Christ  the  crucified,  as  also  the  reference  of  the 
"  restoring  and  building  "  of  the  city  and  tem- 
ple in  V.  25  to  the  establishing  of  the  church  oi 
the  New   Covenant  ;  cf.   Barnabas,    Ep. ,  c.  10 : 


CHAP    IX.  1-27. 


207 


yeypaTTTai  yap  Kal  la-rm^  eSi^nudt]/^^  enwrn^joviitvr/^. 
o'LKo6oaJi^i]a£Tai  raof  i^foi-  fi'tio^wf  i—l  tu  oi'6aa7i 
Ki'iiiov.  K7/..  The  different  exegetes  varied  ex- 
ceedingly, however,  in  the  mode  of  reckoning 
the  years.*  Jerome,  on  this  passage,  already 
mentions  nine  different  methods  of  explaining 
them  :  (1)  that  of  Jul.  Africanus,  who  reckoned 
the  490  years  from  Xehemiah,  or  the  20th  year 
of  Artaxerxes.  to  the  death  of  Christ,  but  in 
connection  with  this  committed  the  error  of 
reckoning  by  Jewish  lunar  years  (resulting  in 
only  465  solar  years)  ;  (2i  Three  different  the- 
ories of  Eusebius,  who  (a)  dates  the  first  sixty- 
nine  weeks  from  the  return  of  the  Jews  in  the 
reign  of  Cyrus  to  the  death  of  Alexander  Jau- 
naeus,  the  high  priest  and  king,  and  Pompey's 
invasion  (B.C.  SyC-BC.  64;  thus  in  Dem.  ev.. 
VIII.  2,  55  et  seq.) ;  or  (J)  from  the  second  year 
of  Darius  Hystaspis  (B.C.  520  to  the  birth  of 
Christ  (ibid,  and  C'/tronic.  01.  184);  or,  (c)  re- 
gards the  last  week  as  a  period  of  seventy  years, 
and  attempts  to  calculate  from  the  resurrection 
of  Christ ;  (8)  that  of  Hippolytus,  who  counted 
si.xty-nine  mystical  weeks  (comprising  more  than 
seven  years  each)  from  the  first  year  of  Cyrus 
to  the  incarnation  of  Christ,  and  declared  that 
the  last  my,stical  week  denotes  the  future  period 
of  the  antichrist,  which  is  connected  with  the 
end  of  the  world  ;  (4)  that  of  ApoUinaris  of 
Laodicea,  who  reckoned  the  490  years  from  the 
birth  of  Christ  ("  rti  exitu  Verbi,"  v.  25),  and 
therefore  expected  the  coming  of  the  antichrist 
and  the  end  of  the  world  about  a  century  after 
his  day,  in  the  "  last  week  ;  "  (5)  that  of  Clem- 
ens Alex,  who  extended  the  seventy  weeks  of 
year.s,  in  the  face  of  all  chronology,  from  the 
fir.st  year  of  Cyrus  to  the  second  year  of  Vespa- 
sian (B.C.  560- A. D.  70);  (6)  that  of  Origen, 
who  denies  the  possibility  of  any  more  exact 
chronological  estimate,  and  therefore  assumes 
4yuO  years  instead  of  490,  reaching  from  Adam 
to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus  (not 
indeed  in  vol.  X.  of  his  Stromitta,  which  Je- 
rome cites,  but  in  his  Tract.  XXI V.  on  Matthew 
c.  24)  ;  (7)  that  of  Tertullian  (mlc.  Jiidiws,  c.  8), 
who  reckons  the  437i  years  from  the  first  year 
of  Darius  Nothus  (whom  he  strangely  identifies 
with  Darius  Medus)  to  the  birth  of  Christ,  and 
fifty- two  and  a  half  from  that  event  to  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  thus  obtaining  490. — 
Jerome  himself  expresses  no  opinion  respecting 
the  mode  of  reckoning  to  be  observed,  but  seems 
to  favor  that  of  Africanus,  which  he  preferred 
to  all  the  others,  and  probably  not  without  rea- 
son. That  method  is  likewise  adopted  by  Chry- 
sostom,  Theodoret,  Isidore  of  Pelusium,  Euthy- 
naius  Zigabenns,  and  generally  by  a  majority  of 
expositors  in  the  Oriental  church,  but  few  of 
whom  asf.ume  an  independent  position.  Among 
the  latter  are,  e.f/.,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (Catech. 
xii.   ID),   who  attempts  to  extend  the  seventy 

*  On  tni«  \>ouit,  c-f.  KeiiRch,  Die  jtatrUtischen  herech- 
nutiffen  der  7U  Jahriotn-hen  Daniein,  in  the  TUbintjer 
Tlteol.  QuaruiUcnriJc,  lt>68.  No.  iv.,  p.  535  et  te.i.  ;  also 
Reinke,  DU  Me/tttanOtcfieit  Weinsafjutifjen,  iv.  1,  3Mt  et  seq. 
The  (Statements  of  the  latter  are,  however,  padly  in  need  of 
c-rrection  ant]  FUiipIenientin^  by  l^o^e  of  Ueusch. 

\\.n  tvhiition  to  Keiisch's  treatise,  Keil  refers  to  the  follow- 
ing KVinimariew  .  "  for  the  period  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  of 
more  modem  times,  .\br.  Colovii  EfeVaa*?  tfieoln(/ica Ue  xeptu- 
aijinta  (teptiVA.viis  DantelfJi.  in  the  Bihiia  iUn^tr.  ad  Dan. 
U.,  und  IIuv(  niick's  MIiKt.)ryof  the  Interpretation,"  in  his 
CoTument.,  p.  3S0  sq.  ;  and  for  the  most  recent  ]ierio<l, 
R,  Ba.^kmann,  '  on  the  Book  of  LtanieL,'  in  the  Theoiog. 
itwiim  u.'KrUikim,  18(13,  III.,  p.  iTi  sq.'] 


weeks  of  years  from  the  sixth  year  of  DariuB 
Medus  to  the  birth  of  Christ,  but  violates  his- 
torical accuracy  by  identifying  Darius  Medus 
with  Darius  Hystaspis ;  Ephraem  Syrus  who 
places  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem  in  the  be- 
ginning of  the  sevenrieth  week  and  the  destruc 
tion  by  Titus  at  its  close,  without  entering  or  » 
more  careful  calculation  m  other  respec;s; 
Polychronius,  a  brother  of  Theodore  of  Mopeu- 
estia,  who  reckons  the  first  seven  weeks  from 
Darius  Medus  to  the  ninth  year  of  Darius  Hy- 
staspis, when  Zerubbabel's  temple  is  said  to  have 
been  completed,  the  sixty-two  weeks  from  the 
twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes  to  the  birth  of 
Christ,  and  the  final  week  from  that  date  to 
Titus,  while  the  death  of  Christ  falls  in  its  cen- 
tral point;  Basil  of  Seleucia  (Orat.,  38  in  t.  85 
of  Migne's  Patrol.),  who  calculates  the  first 
sixty-nine  weeks  from  the  completion  of  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem  in  the  twenty-eighth  year  of 
Xerxes  (!)  to  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  and 
identifies  the  seventieth  week  with  the  first  seven 
years  after  the  resurrection,  while  he  declares 
the  abomination  of  desolation  erected  in  the 
middle  of  that  week  to  have  been  the  familiar 
attempt  of  Caligula  to  erect  his  image  in  the 
temple. — Among  the  later  expositors  of  the 
Latin  church,  Augustine,  follott-ing  the  example 
of  Jerome,  avoids  every  independent  and  detail- 
ed calculation  of  the  seventy  weeks.  He  con- 
tents himself  with  finding  a  fulfilment  of  the 
leading  fe,atures  of  the  prophecy  Dan.  ix.  24  et 
seq.,  in  the  earthly  work  of  Christ  and  in  the 
judgment  of  Jerusalem,  and  expres.sly  rejects 
(especially  in  Ep.  199  "  (le  fine  sa'culii")  the 
opinion  of  those  who  looked  for  two  periods 
of  seventy  weeks  of  years,  the  first  of  which 
should  reach  to  Christ's  advent  in  the  flesh,  and 
the  second  to  the  end  of  the  world.  This  as- 
sumption of  a  double  period  of  seventy  weeks 
of  years,  or  of  an  Old-Test,  and  typical  realiza- 
tion of  the  prophecy,  followed  by  a  New-Test. 
antitypical  fulfilment,  was  advocated  as  late  as 
the  sixth  century  by  the  unknown  Arian  author 
of  the  so-called  Qpiis  imperj'ectum  in  Matthaion. 
Sulpicius  Severus  {Cliruii.,  II.  21)  extends  the 
sixty-nine  weeks  from  the  thirty-second  .year  of 
Artaxerxes  I.  to  Vespasian,  or  from  the  restora- 
tion of  the  temple  to  its  second  destruction.  His 
contemporary,  Julius  Hilarianus,  appears  in  his 
Chronolvgia  «.  Ubellus  de  miindi  duratione  (in 
Migne.  t.  13,  p.  1098)  as  the  forerunner  of  the 
modem  critical  exposition,  in  consequence  of 
his  denial  of  the  direct  Messianic  character  of 
the  prophecy,  whose  fulfilment  he  places  in  the 
age  of  Autiochus  and  the  Maccabees ;  but  he 
commits  the  gross  chronological  blunder  of  .as- 
signing 434  years  ( :=  62  weeks)  to  the  interval 
between  the  return  of  the  Jews  under  Zerub- 
babel  and  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
while  the  period  between  B.C.  536  and  B.C.  175 
really  amounts  to  but  361  years  !  Prosper  Aqui- 
tan  in  his  Clironicon  adopts  the  view  advocated 
by  Eusebius  in  the  DemonMr.  evangelica  and  the 
Chron.  (see  supra.  No.  2  A),  and  accordingly 
reckons  the  sixty-nine  weeks  from  the  building 
of  the  temple  under  Darius  to  Herod  the  Gr.  and 
the  birth  of  Christ.  Finally,  the  venerable  Bede 
adopts  substantially  the  view  of  Julius  African- 
us {Libdl.  de  temporuni  ratione,  c.  7).  as  do«t 
also  Thomas  Aquinas  (Comm.  in  Dan.,  in  Opp 
t.  XIII.  ed.  Antverpj. 


808 


THE  PROPHET  DAXIEL. 


4.  The  erpositors  of  modern  times,  and  more 
particularly  of  prerationalistic  times,  are  agreed 
in  recognizing  the  Messianic  bearing  of  this  pro- 
phecy, but  differ  exceedingly  in  their  modes  of 
reckoning  the  seventy  weeks,  or,  what  amounts 
to  the  same  thing,  in  their  interpretations  of 
-]--[  Stsia,  V.  2.1.*  As  the  tenninvs  a  quo  of 
the  seventy  weeks  they  accept  one  of  the  follow- 
ing dates : 

«.  The  time  of  the  first  prophecy  by  Jeremiah 
(Jer.  XXV.  11  et  seq. )',  or  the  fourth  year  of  Je- 
hoiakim's  reign  ;  thus  Harduin  ( Chroml.  Vet. 
Test.,  Amstel..  1T09,  p.  592  sa.);  A.  Calmet 
(Dmert.  sur  ks  70  semaines  de  Daniel,  Dis- 
tertt.,  p.  1);  A.  Collins  {The  scheme  of  liberal 
prophecy,  I.  109). 

b.  The  time  of  Jeremiah's  secmid  prophecy 
(Jer.  xxix.  10)  or  the  fourth  year  of  Zedekiah ; 
so  Seb.  Mimster.  Vatablus  (and  also  several  ex- 
positors belonging  to  the  last  centuries  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  e.g. ,  Lyranus,  in  the  PostiUa,  Raym, 
Martini,  Fugio  fid.,  2,  209,  etc.). 

c.  The  date  of  Daniel's  prophecy  itself  (chap, 
ix.  1),  and  hence  the  first  year  of_  the  reign  of 
Darius  Medus  over  Babylon,  B.  C.  539  ;  so  J.  H. 
Jungmann  (Cassel,  1081) ;  J.  Koch  {Entsiegelter 
Daniel.  II.,  §206,  and Kune  Anfangsgritiideder 
Chronologic.  II.  24),  J.  D.  Michaelis  {Versuch 
iiber  die  70  Wochen  Daniels,  GKJtt.  and  Gotha, 
1770 ;  cf .  his  Epistula  de  Septuag.  hebckmi.  ad 
Jo.  Pringle.  London,  1773);  Matth.  Hassenkamp 
(  Versiich  einer  neuen  Erklurvng  der  70  Wochen 
Daniels,  Lemgo,  1772)  ;  Velthusen  (Muthma^- 
sungen  iiber  die  siebenmal  siebenzig  Jahre  beim 
Daniel  ix.  24-27,  Hanover,  1774). 

d.  The  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Cyrus.  B.C. 
560  ;  Calvin,  CEcolampadius,  I'Empereur,  Coc- 
ceius,  Matth.  Bervaldua  {Chronicon  «».  auctori- 
tate  constitutum.  III.  7),  B.  Blayney  {A  disserta- 
tion by  way  of  Inquiry  into  Daniel's  seventy 
Weeks,  Oxford.  1775),  H.  Uri  (Sept.  hebdoma- 
duni,  quas  Gabriel  ad  Manielem  detulerat,  in- 
terpretatio.  paraphnisis,  cmnputalio,  Oxford, 
1788),  also  Dathe,  Hegel,  etc. ,  in  their  commen- 

e.  The  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Danus  Hys- 
taapl?  (B.C.  520),  or  the  year  of  the  prophe  ies 
of  blessing  by  Haggai  (i.  1  et  seq. ;  ii.  1  et  seq.) 
and  Zechariah  (i.  1  et  seq.  ;  iii.  8  et  seq.  ;  vui. 
7  et  seq.);  so  J.  Driedo  (De  scripti^s  et  dogmati- 
bus  ecdesiasticis,  c.  5).  Com.  Jansen  (Concord, 
evangel.,  c.  122),  J.  A.  Bengel  (Ordo  temporum, 
etc.,  Stuttgart,  1741). 

/.  The  second  year  of  the  reign  ot  Danus  No- 
thus  (B.C.  423| ;  so  J.  J.  Scaliger  (De  emendat. 
temporum,  1.  4),  S.  Calvisius  (Opus  chronohgi- 
ctim). 

g.  The  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus;  so  Luther  (D.  PropJiet  Daniel 
deutsch,  etc.,  vol.  41,  p.  247,  ed.  Erl.),  Melanc- 
thon  (Comm.  p.  891),  Sal.  Glossius  [Philol.  sacra). 

h.  The  seventh  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longima- 
nns,  or  the  date  of  the  first  decree  by  this  king 
to  rebuUd  Jerusalem  (Ezra  vii.  1  ;  viii.  11  et 
Beq.);  so  Abr.  Calov  (De  Septuag.  sej}timanis 
my-sterimn.  Viteb.,  1663  ;  Dibl.  illustr.,  I.,  p.  119 
Bs. ).  M.  Geier,  in  the  Comm.,  Isaac  Newton 
(Ohservations.  etc. ),  J.  R.  Rus  (Diss,  de  Sept. 
hehdom.  Danielis,  Jenaj,  1740),  H.  Benzcl  (/>MS. 
df  70  hebdd.    Danielis,   in   the    Syntagma   dts- 

•  CI.  Bertholdt,  Daniel,  II.  p.,  587  et  aeq. 


serlntt.,  11.,  31  as.),  H.  Prideaux  (Connectiont, 
etc.),  Alex.  Sostmann  [CommeiU.  chrond.  pkHd. 
et  extget.  in  orac.  Dan.  ix.  24r-27.  Lugd.  B. 
1710),  S.  Deyling  (Profjr.  ad  Dan.  ix.  24  ss., 
Lips.,  1724),  J.  G.  Franck  (yocuin  systema 
chronologia  funda.mentalis,  Gott. .  1778).  J  .  C. 
Dnderleiu  (/««««««.  Theol.  chr.,  II.,  p.  530  ss.). 
i.  The  ticentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longim- 
anus, or  the  date  of  the  scctmd  ed'ct  by  that 
king  (Neh.  ii.  1,  7  et  seq.);  so  Luther  (Dass 
Jesus  Christus  ein  giborner  Jude  sei,  vol.  29.  p. 
71  et  seq.,  ed.  Erl.  ),*  H  J.  Oflft-rhaus  (DissertaU 
de  70  septimanis  Danielis,  Groning..  1756), 
J  G.  'Reiaheck  (Betrachtungen  iiber  die  Augsb. 
Confession,  III.,  39),  S.  S.  Weickhmann  (Carmen 
Danielis  de  70  hebdd.  Christo  vindicai..  Prog., 
Viteb.,  1772),  Starke  (Synops.,  p.  2614). 

k.  The  tenth  or  eleventh  year  of  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus,  or  the  earlier  dat  e  by  about  ten 
years  assigned  to  his  second  edict,  on  the  ground 
of  his  co-regency  with  his  father  Xerxes  ;  so 
Dion.  PetaMivLB  {Doctrina  teinjy]).,  L.  12,  c.  29; 
Mtionarium  tempih.  II.,  3,  c.  9).  Camp.  Vitiinga 
[De  Septuag.  hebdom.  Dan.  adeers.  Marsha- 
mvm,  Observatt.  sacr.,  II.,  p.  290  ss.),  C.  B. 
Michaelis  (in  Annntt.  vberior.,  etc.). 

I.  The  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Xerxes , 
so  J.  E.  Faber  (Jesus  ex  natalium  opportunitate 
Messias,  Jense,  1772,  p.  125  ss.). 

A  great  difference  of  opinion  prevailed  also 
with  reference  to  the  particular  teminus  ad 
griem  of  the  prophecy  referred  to  Christ,  inas- 
much as  (a)  some,  following  Eusebius,  Cyril  of 
Jerusalem,  Jacob  of  Edessa,  and  othpr  ancient 
churchly  expositors,  extended  the  seventy  weeks 
merely  to  the  death  of  Christ,  others  (b)  con- 
tinued them  to  the  time  of  his  presentation  in 
the  temple  (Jungmann.  Sostmann,  etc.),  others 
(c)  to  his  baptism  in  the  Jordan  or  to  his  anoint- 
ing (Melancthon,  Calvin,  Vitringa ;  also  \V. 
Whiston,  Dissertation  upon  Daniel's  weeks, 
London,  1725>,  still  others  (cf)  to  the  year  of  our 
Lord's  death  (Luther,  Calov,  Prideaux,  Buddeus, 
H.  Ecd.  Vet.  Ti..  p.  854  ss.),  and  others  finally 
(e)  included  the  more  general  spread  of  the 
Gospel  in  the  years  immediately  following  the 
Saviour's  death  in  the  series  of  the  seventy 
weeks  (Petavius.  Bengtl,  J.  Brunsmann,  etc.).— 
Various  methods  were  adopted  in  order  to  ob- 
viate, by  means  of  exact  calculation,  the  dis- 
crepancy between  the  termin.  a  quo  and  ad 
quern,  which  was  either  too  large  or  too  small. 
According  to  Bertholdt,  p.  574  et  seq.,  they  may 
be  designated  as  follows  : 

(1).  The  method  of  parcdlelism  by  which  the 
seven  and  the  sixty-two  weeks  were  reckoned 
from  the  same  point  of  time,  or  by  which  these 
periods  were  not  regarde  I  as  successive  in  their 
order,  but  as  contemporaneous  with  each  other 
(Haiduin.  Jungmann.  Collins,  Marsham,  etc.). 

(2).  The  merhod  of  intercalation  which  con- 
sisted in  interpolating  intervals  of  greater  or  less 
extent  between  the  several  periods  of  hebdo- 
mads, and  especially  between  the  sixty-ninth 
and  seventieth  weeks  (I'Empereur,  Newton, 
Koch,  Beer,  Uri,  etc.). 

(3).  The  method  of  tranposition  by  which 
the  first  two  periods  of  hebdomads  were  enum- 

*  Luther,  however,  confouluis  Artaxerxes  I.,  who  figures 
in  the  book  of  Nehemmh.  with  C.iml..v.ses.  cf.  also  the  work. 
Von  elm  Juden  una  iliren  Liigen.  vol.  M,  pp.  ISO  et  seq.. 
Hi  et  seq. 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27 


209 


erated  in  inverted  order,  i.e..  the  sixty  two  first, 
and  the  seven  afterward  (thus,  in  imitation  of 
TertuUian,  Theodoret,  etc.,  some  of  the  most 
recent  expositors,  especially  Hof  mann,  Delitzsch, 
Wieseler,  etc.). 

(4).  The  analogical  method  which  estimates 
the  hebdomads  in  the  several  sections  by  an  un- 
equal standard,  e.g.,  regarding  the  seventieth 
week  as  a  '■^  sfptimaiia  magiia"  or  Jubilee 
period  of  forty  nine  years  (Newton,  Frank; 
similarly  Calmet,  A.  Kluit  {Vaticininm  de  Mes- 
Ha  duce  primarium  s.  explic.  Sejyt.  hebdd.  Dan.. 
Mediol.,  1774],  and  already  many  of  the  church 
fathers  mentioned  above,  as  Eusebius,  Poly- 
chronius,  etc.). 

(5).  The  method  of  reckoning  by  lunar  years 
of  354  days,  without  an  intercalated  month 
(Hassenkamp  and  J.  D.  Michaelts — after  the 
precedent  of  Jul.  Africanus  and  his  patristic 
successors) . 

(6).  The  method  of  cowubm^by  juUlee  periods 
of  fifty  years  each,  by  which  the  seventy  years 
appear  to  be  exactly  equal  to  500  years  (Sost- 
mann  and  others). 

(7).  The  method  of  reckoning  by  Chaldee 
years'of  3(i0  days,  by  which  the  seventy  hebdo- 
mads are  reduced  to  483  years  (Pet.  Brinch, 
Diss,  chroml.-eritiea  de  70  hebdomadd.  Danielis, 
Hafn.,  1702). 

(8).  The  mystical  method  of  enumeration, 
which  seeks  either  to  limit  or  extend  the  sev- 
enty weeks  of  years  by  the  use  of  a  year  of  any 
abnormal  and  my.stical  length.  Hippolytus  and 
others  led  the  way  in  the  ancient  church  in  this 
method;  and  following  them  we  have  J.  J. 
Hainlinus  {Clams  sacror.  teniporum.  Tub.,  1G1I2, 
aud  Sol  temporuni  s.  Clironol.  mystica.  Tub., 
lU47i;  Bengel,  Thube,  Crusius  Ulypomnemata 
in  thmlo'jiam  prophetimm).  Amonsj  them  Hain- 
lin  assumed  snorter  years  than  the  ordinary, 
giving  them  343  days  each,  and  thus  obtained 
4U0  Julian  years  for  the  seventy  weeks.  Ben- 
gel,  Thube,  etc.,  on  the  other  hand,  sought  to 
amplify,  and  therefore  fixed  the  length  of  a 
mystical  year  at  1-,-,',-  solar  years,  and  thu.s  ob- 
tained 555  J  years  for  the  period  of  seventy 
weeks. 

5.  The  critico-rationalistic  or  anti- Messianic 
expositors  of  recent  times  may  be  divided  into 
two  principal  classes  : 

A.  That  of  the  emendators  who  adopt  a  vio- 
lent course,  and  seek  to  remove  the  chronological 
difficulty  by  means  of  exegetical  or  critical  as- 
sumptions of  a  more  or  legs  arbitrary  character, 
e.g.,  {1)  by  the  assertion  that  the  seventy  weeks 
are  ordinary  weeks  and  therefore  490  days,  and 
extended  from  the  d.ay  of  the  vision  to  the  time 
of  Cyrus  and  of  laying  the  foundations  of  the 
temple  (thus  the  Eng.-work,  A  free  Inquiry  into 
DanieVs  vui/m  or  Proj^hecy  of  tlie  Seventy  Weeks, 
London,  1776 ;  cf.  Bertholdt,  p.  554  et  seq. ) ; 
(2)  by  the  assertion  that  Daniel,  who  wrote 
after  the  time  of  Cyrus,  predicted  to  the  people 
an  impending  second  destruction  of  the  recently 
restored  temple  in  this  prophecy,  which  was 
therefore  not  fulfilled  (Eckermann,  Theol.  Bei- 
trdge,  I.  1,  p.  132  et  seq.) ;  (3)  by  the  assumption 
that  vs.  25-27  are  the  gloss  of  some  7Y(i«j_  (Franz 
L;)wenheim.  Ingnisitio  critica  exegetica  in  diffi- 
eult  proj'h.  Dun.,  c.  ix.,  etc.  Wirceb.,  1787)  ; 
(4)  hy  several  less  important  changes  in  the  read- 
in'.'  of  V.  24  or  25,  such  as  were  proposed  by 
14 


Schmidt  (in  Paulus'  ilemoi  ahilia,  VII. ,  41  et  seq.), 
Velthuaen,  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Jahn,  et  al.  Tha 
first  (with  whom  Baumgarten-Crusius  agrees, 
Bibl.  Theol.,  p.  370)  reads  v.  24,  a"'?="^"  =-?=';:'' 
' '  seventy,  yea,  seventy  years "  (which  is  in- 
tended to  indicate  the  duration  of  the  exile), 
and  then  translates  v.  25,  "from  the  present 
time  to  the  Messiah  are  seventy,  seven,  sixty, 
and  two  weeks,"  which  is  interpreted  to  mean 
that  ' '  twice  seventy  years  may  elapse  before  his 
advent"  (!).  Velthusen  (Muthmassungen  iibei 
die  siebenmal  70  Jahre  de^  Daniel,  Han- 
over, 1774)  reads  v.  aS  2"i5=c'  n^ar  O-rr- 
J.  D.  Michaelis  ( Versuch  iiber  die  70  Jahr- 
wochen  Daniels,  Gutt.,  1771)  emends  the  sam«" 
passage  so  as  to  read  -"'^r'r-l  '^?r'?  ""'?-■?■• 
Jahn  {Herm.  sacra.  Append.,  t.  I.),  on  the  other 
hand,  reads  v.  24,  like  Schmidt,  Ci:;3  Oii'Za 
(the  seventy  years  of  the  captivity),  and  then 
renders  V.  25  njar  Diyar  (70  x  7  or  4SI0  years, 
which  reach  from  Cyrus  to  B.C  64),  and  adds 
in  addition  =1:™^  a^ffid  D^S^ri  (Le.,  seventy 
years,  to  A.  D.  7  or  8,  and  sixty-two  years,  to 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus). 

B.  The  more  considerate  and  scientific  ex- 
positors  of  the  critical  school  conceive  of  the 
passage  as  belonging  to  the  times  of  Antiochu* 
Epiphanes,  and  as  a  Vnticinium  ex  ecentu  relat- 
ing to  that  age.  In  this  view  they  were  pre- 
ceded by  numerous  Jewish  and  a  few  Christian 
representatives  of  the  Maccaba^an  interpreta- 
tion (e.g..  by  Julius  HUjirLanus,  about  A.D.  400  ; 
by  Marsham,  an  Englishman  [Canon  chron.,  p. 
(jlO  ss.],  the  Jesuit  Harduin  [0;^).  selecta,  p. 
593  ss.;  cf.  Kohler,  De  Harduin  noea  sed  inepta 
interpretatione  vatic,  apmi  Dan.  de  70  hebd., 
Altorf,  1721],  and  the  English  free-thinker  Ant. 
Collins  [Scheme  of-  Liter<d  Pro^)hecy,  Lond., 
1726]).  So  Corrodi  (Krit.  Qesch.  des  Ghilinsnius, 
p.  247  et  seq.,  and  Freiniiithige  Vcrsiiche  iiber 
verschiedene  in  Tlievlogie  und  biblische  Krilik 
einschligende  Materien,  p.  42  etseq.),  who,  how- 
ever, introduced  much  that  is  arbitr.117  in  devel- 
oping his  scheme.  He  renewed,  for  instance, 
the  questionable  expedient  of  transposing  the 
weeks  [see  No.  4  (3)],  reckoning  first  sixty-two 
hebdomads  from  the  beginning  of  the  captivity 
to  the  first  invasion  of  Judaja  by  Epiphanes,  then 
seven  hebdomads  from  the  date  of  the  composi- 
tion of  the  book  of  pseudo-Daniel  to  the  Mac- 
cabasan  Messiah,  who,  it  is  alleged,  was  expected 
to  appear  about  the  year  B.C.  115,  and  finally 
inserting  a  single  hebdomad  between  the  two 
former  periods,  to  which  last  week  he  assigns 
the  actual  persecutions,  which  involved,  e.g..  the 
murder  of  Onias  III.,  the  interruption  of  the 
sacrifices,  etc. — Another  representative  of  this 
tendency  is  Eichhom  {AUgem.  Bibliuthek  de) 
biblisehen  Literatur,  III.,  761  et  seq.)  who  follows 
the  method  by  parallelism  [No.  4  (1)]  rather 
than  that  of  transposition,  calculating  the  first 
seven  hebdomads  backwards  from  the  edict  of 
Cyrus  in  B.C.  536  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusa 
lem  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  but  reckoning  the  sixty- 
two  weeks  forward  from  the  fourth  year  of  .Je- 
hoiakim  (B.C.  605)  to  Ant.  Epiphanes.  and  tha 
final  week  from  the  death  of  Onias  to  the  res- 
toration of  the  temple  services  by  Judas  Mao- 


210 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


cabaaus. — Eichhom's  hypothesis  found  an  ad-  1 
herent  in  v.  Ammon.  who  adopted  it  in  his  ; 
Biblischc  Theohgie  (U.  217  et  seq. )  with  hut  few  , 
changes ;  but  Bertholdt  opposed  it  with  keen 
criticism,  and  advanced  instead  the  following 
explanation  :  "seventy  weeks  of  years  are  de- 
termined upon  the  Jews  until  the  expiation  of 
their  sin  [i. e.,  to  the  dedication  of  the  temple  by 
Judas  Maccabjeus).  and,  more  particularly,  from 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnez- 
zar to  the  reign  of  Cyrus,  forty-nine  years  or 
seven  weeks  of  years  ;  within  a  period  of  sirty- 
two  further  weeks  of  years  Jerusalem  is  to  be 
rebuilt  (hence  to  the  time  of  Epiphanes).  At 
about  the  end  of  these  sixty-two  weeks  (?  !) 
Alexander  the  Gr.  dies,  without  leaving  a  natur- 
al successor.  Afterward  Jerusalem  is  desolated 
by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  forms  an  alliance 
with  numerous  apostate  Je%vs,  that  continues 
during  nearly  a  week  of  years.  At  the  middle 
of  that  week  he  interrupts  the  temple  services 
and  erects  the  statue  of  Jupiter  Olympus  on  a 
wing  of  the  temple — until  death  overtakes  him." 
So  far  as  the  chronological  order  of  the  seven 
and  sixty-two  weeks  is  concerned,  this  exposi- 
tor is  therefore  not  a  parallelist,  but  a  represen- 
tative of  the  theory  that  they  denote  successive 
periods.  To  obviate  the  exorbitant  interval  of 
sixty-two  weeks  of  years  between  B.C.  .136  and 
B.C.  175,  he  assumes  that,  as  a  whole,  the  state- 
ments by  the  oracle  respecting  time  "  are  not  to 
be  taken  mathematically,  but  prophetically  and 
indefinitely  "  (p.  613)  ! — Bertholdt's  theory  is 
accepted  by  Griesinger  (Ktue  Ansidd  ilcr  Auf- 
stlUe  im  Bitch  Dnniel,  181.5,  p.  92)  and  substan- 
tially also  by  Bleek.  The  latter  (Theolxj. 
Ztitsclir.  of  Sclileiermacher.  deWette.  and  L  icke, 
1.S22,  and  Jahrhb.  f.  d.  ThedUtgU,  1860)  differs 
from  Bertholdt  in  several  particulars,  c..'/.,  in  not 
dating  the  commencement  of  the  first  seven 
weeks  of  years  from  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem, but  from  the  prophetic  oracle  of  Jeremiah, 
chapters  xxv.  and  xxix, ,  and  in  extending  the 
sixty-two  weeks  exactly  to  the  death  of  Seleu- 
cus  Philopater  (the  H^w^  without  a  successor, 
V.  26).  But  they  are  entirely  agreed  in  placing 
the  seven,  sixty-two,  and  one  weeks  in  succes- 
sion to  each  otlaer,  and  in  most  positively  reject- 
ing every  parallelism  or  transposition  of  these 
periods,  as  being  contrary  to  the  sense  of  the 
vision  {Jnhrbb.,  etc.,  p.  83). — H.  L.  Reichel  {Die 
■cier  Welti-eiche  des  Propheten.  Daniel,  in  the 
Theol.  Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1848)  and  Kamphausen  in 
Bunsen's  Bibehrerk  advocate  views  similar  to 
those  of  Bleek,  excepting  that  the  latter  holds 
that  the  "anointed  one"  of  v.  26  denotes  the 
high  priest  Onias,  instead  of  Seleucus  Philopater. 
. — Several  others,  however,  again  made  use  of 
parallelisms,  e.g.,  Rosch  (Die  70  Jnhriroch- 
en  des  Buch^s  Daniel,  geiiau  chronohgisch 
Wichgemexen,  Stud.  u.  Krit.,  1834),  v.  Lengerke, 
and  Hitzig.  The  first  takes  the  year  B.C.  609 
as  the  starting-point  of  the  tiro  parallel  epochs 
a.s  being  the  year  which  the  alleged  pseudo- 
Daniel  assumed  for  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem. The  seven  weeks  of  years,  beginning  at 
that  date,  were  to  continue  until  the  commence- 
ment of  the  reign  of  Cyrus.  B  C.  560.  and  the 
«ixty-two  weeks  until  the  death  of  Seleucus 
Philopater,  the  "anointed  one  who  should  be 
cut  off  j  "  but  this  period  is  lengthened  by  the 


addition  of  eight  farther  weeks,  which  reach  to 
B.C.  120  or  to  John  Hyrcanus.  the  political 
Messiah  of  Judaism  in  the  Maccabsean  period. 
Von  Lengerke  likewise  regards  the  seven  and 
the  sixty-two  years  as  being  parallel,  but  dateg 
them  from  B.C.  588.  The  sixty-  wo  were  to  ex- 
pire with  the  murder  of  Seleucus  Philopater, 
the  "anointed  one,"  v.  26  (although  this  is  said 
to  involve  an  error  of  21-22  years  in  the  reckon- 
ing of  pseudo-Daniel,  since  the  434  years,  it 
calculated  from  588.  would,  in  fact,  reach  to 
B.C.  154),  and  the  seventieth  week  was  to  reach 
from  170  to  the  death  of  Antiochus  in  B.C.  164. 
There  is  consequently  a  gap  of  about  six  years 
between  the  close  of  the  sixty-second  week  and 
the  beginning  of  the  last!  Hitzig  subjects  this 
hypothesis  of  v.  Lengerke  to  a  searching  criti- 
cism, but  on  his  part,  likewise  adopts  an  arbi- 
trary explanation  based  on  parallelisms.  He  (a) 
inserts  the  seven  weeks  of  years  between  B.C. 
588  and  539  ;  (A)  the  sixty -t«  o  weeks  or  434 
years,  on  the  other  hand,  are  reckoned  back- 
ward, from  B.C.  172  to  B.C.  606.  the  year  in 
which  Jeremiah  uttered  his  prophecy  respecting 
the  seventy  years ;  (c)  the  seventieth  week  ex- 
tends from"  April,  B.C.  170,  to  the  end  of  March, 
164,  and  the  murder  of  Onias.  the  "  anointed 
one,"  V.  26,  falls  in  the  beginning  of  this  last 
week.  This  hypothesis  comes  nearest  to  that  of 
Eichhom,  from  which  it  differs  merely  in  reck- 
oning the  seven  weeks  forward  from  588,  and 
the  sixty-two  backward  from  172.  while  Eich- 
hom counts  the  .seven  weeks  in  a  retrograde 
order,  and  the  sixty-two  progressively. — A  pe- 
culiar mode  of  reckoning  was  adopted  by  Ewald, 
which  may  be  characterized  as  the  abbreviating 
method.  It  first  reckons  the  seven  weeks  of 
years  from  B.  C.  588  to  539,  and  the  sixty-two 
weeks  from  thence  to  B.  C.  105,  but  then  assumes 
a  shortening  of  the  latter  period  of  434  years 
by  seventy  (which  reduction,  it  is  alleged,  was 
formerly  indicated  in  the  text  itself  by  a  note 
after  v.  25  or  v.  27  that  has  now  been  lost),  and 
by  this  method  returns  to  the  year  B.C.  175,  in 
which  the  "  anointed  one  was  cut  off,"  i.e..  in 
which  Seleucus  Philopater  died — and  approxi- 
mately at  the  same  time,  the  year  in  which  the 
momentous  last  week  began,  which  extends 
from  B.C.  174  to  167  (p.  424  et  seq.). — Wieseler 
in  substance  (in  his  treatise.  Die  70  ^Yochen, 
formerly  followed  the  method  of  parallelism 
etc.,  Gottingen,  1839),  but  at  a  later  period  pre- 
ferred a  peculiar  modification  of  the  transposing 
method  (in  his  review  of  the  Times  of  Daniel, 
by  the  duke  of  Manchester,  Giitt.  Get- Am. , 
1846).  In  the  former  instance  he  reckoned  the 
sixty-two  weeks  from  B.C.  606  to  B.C.  172,  and 
the  last  week  from  172-165,  and  regarded  the 
seven  weeks  as  not  admissible  or  to  be  counted  be- 
side the  other  sixty-three  (pp.  102  et  seq.  ;  123  et 
seq. ) ;  but  in  the  latter,  while  he  continues  to  reck- 
on the  sixty-three  weeks  from  B.C.  606-165.  he 
places  the  seven  weeks  after  them,  as  represent- 
ing the  period  which  was  to  elapse  between  the 
week  of  severe  tribulation  and  the  advent  of 
the  Messiah  (the  1^3:  "'^r "?,  v.  25,  who  is  to  be 
carefully  distinguished  from  the  '^'r'?  men- 
tioned in  V.  26,  where  Onias  is  intended).  This 
period,  which  must  not  be  calculated  with 
mathematical  exactness,  but  is  to  be  interpreted 
spiritually,   denotes  a  jubilee   cycle,   that  has 


CHAP.  IX.  1-37. 


211 


grown  from  a  period  of  fifty  years  into  one  of 
more  than  150  years,  since  Christ  was  bom  160 
years  after  the  date  of  its  beginning  (p.  131  et 
seq.).  Wieseler's  modification  of  the  transpos- 
ing method  may  be  denominated  the  lenytltciuiif/ 
hypothesis,  in  contradistinction  from  Ewald's 
abbreviating  method.  It  obviously  forms  the 
point  of  transition  to  the  Messianic  conception 
jf  the  text,  and  is  intimately  connected  with 
the  views  of  several  representatives  of  the 
typical-Messianic  interpretation  in  the  latest 
'times. 

6.  The  most  recent  Messianic  es^positors  are 
divided  into  two  classes,  who  advocate  re- 
spectively a  direct-Messianic  interpretation  of 
the  proi>hecy,  or  one  that  is  merely  typically 
Messianic.  * 

A.  To  the  former  class  belong  Less  {Beioeis 
der  WiiJii-heit  der  cliristlicheii  lielii/ion,  p.  275 
et  seq. ),  Sack  {Apologetik,  p.  388  et  seq. ),  Scholl 
iCommentatio  de  Sept.  liehrhnvidibns  Ddnielis, 
Francof. ,  1831),  Dereser,  Havernick.  Hengsten- 
berg,  Allioli,  Reinke,  Stawars,  Sepp,  Weigl,  Aub- 
erlen,  Duke  George  of  Manchester,  Pusey,  Klie- 
f  oth,  etc.  [including  the  great  body  of  English  and 
American  expositors,  with  the  almost  sole  excep- 
tion of  Moses  Stuart] .  In  general,  they  are  agreed 
in  referring  both  the  1^?:  ^'^r?'  ^-  -'^'  '^"'^  ^^^ 
ni3'5,  V.  36,  to  Jesus  Christ,  but  they  differ 
considerably  as  to  the  special  terminus  a  giio  of 
the  prophecy,  or  its  terinians  ad  (/iiein.  A  ma- 
jority regard  the  twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes 
Iiongimanna.  or  B.C.  4.55  (Neh.  i.  1  ;  ii  1)  as 
the  starting  point  of  the  seventy  weeks  or  the 
date  of  the  ^ST  S27a.  They  count  sixty-nine 
weeks  of  years,  or  483  years,  from  that  date  to 
the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Tiberius, 
twenty- eight  asr.  Dionysius,  or  783  a.  u.  c.  (Luke 
iii.  1),  when  the  three  and  a  half  yeai-sof  public 
activity  on  the  part  of  our  Lord  began.  They 
consequently  place  the  Saviour's  death  and  re- 
surrection in  the  middle  of  the  last  week,  and 
refer  the  ib  psi  n^:i-?3  t"3',v.  2G,  to  his  cru- 
cifixion. The  remaining  three  and  a  half  years 
are  regarded  as  a  more  or  less  variable  terminus, 
admitting  of  no  precise  chronological  determina- 
tion, but  rather  transpiring  indefinitely  in  the 
course  of  the  founding  of  Christianity  (so  Less, 
Sack,  SchoU.  Dereser,  Hiivemick,  Hengstenberg, 
Allioli,  Reinke).  Modifications  of  this  theory 
are  advocated  (1)  by  Fr.  Stawars  (-Die  Wei.<.sa- 
guny  Daniels  ix.  34-27  in  Dezug  nnf  dfis  Tanf- 
jahrjesu,  in  the  2'iihinger  'Iheol.  Qtiartiilsc/irift, 
1868,  No.  III.,  p.  416  et  seq.),  who  translates 
-|:T  SSb  p,  V.  35,  '-from  the  fulfilment  of 
God's  promise  to  rebuild  Jerusalem,"  and  con- 
tends that  that  promise  was  fulfilled  in  connec- 
tion with  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem  as  a  city^ 
under  Nehemiah,  in  the  year  458 ;  from  that 
time  to  twenty-six  fer.  Diony.sius  483  years  or 
sixty-nine  weeks  elapsed,  and  immediately  af- 
terward, in  Jan.  37.  Jesus  was  baptized  in  the 
Jordan  by  John ;  (2)  by  Auberlen  and  Pusey, 
who  begin  the  seventy  weeks  in  B.  C.  458,  or  the 
seventh  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  (Ezra 
vii.  7),  instead  of  the  twentieth  year  of  that 
reign,  and  thus  obtain  the  twenty-sixth  year  of 
onr  eera  as  the  close  of  the  sixty-nine  weeks,  or 

•  Cf.  Kllcfoth,  Daniel,  p.  329  et  Beq. 


the  time  of  our  Lord's  baptism ;  (3)  by  Sepp 
(Leben  Jesu.  I.,  p.  248  et  seq.,  second  ed, ),  who 
regards  Ezra  as  the  spiritual  rebuilder  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  therefore  reckons  from  the  year  B.C. 
460.  locating  the  baptism  of  Jesus  in  the  yeai 
778  a.  u .  c. ,  or  A.D.  25  ;  (4)  by  Weigl  ( Ueher  dai 
uahre  Geburts-  und  Sterbe-jahr  Jesu  C/irisii, 
Part  I.,  p.  103  et  seq.),  who  renders  the  words 
at  the  commencement  of  v.  25  "  from  the  cfe- 
cution  of  the  command  to  rebuild  Jerusalem," 
etc. .  and  begins  the  seventy  weeks  with  the  year 
B.C.  453,  thus  obtaining  the  year  783  a  u.  c. ,  or 
A.D.  30,  as  the  time  of  our  Lord's  baptism  ;  (5) 
by  Duke  George  of  Manchester  (in  the  work  re- 
viewed by  Wieseler,  Tlie  times  of  Daniel,  chrono- 
logical and  prophetic(d,  examined  with  relation  to 
the  point  of  contact  betieeeii  sacred  and  profane 
chronology,  Lond.  and  Edinb.,  1845),  who  takes 
the  first  year  of  Darius  Medus  as  the  terminus  a 
quo  of  the  seventy  weeks — identifying  that 
monarch  with  Darius  Nothus,  like  Tertul- 
lian,  Scaliger,  Calvisius,  etc. — and  therefore 
calculates  the  490  years  from  B.C.  424,  which 
brings  him  to  A.D.  60,  the  year  in  which  the 
Christians  fled  from  the  besieged  citj'  of  Jerusa- 
lem, and  in  which  the  Christian  church  was 
really  founded.  He  assumes  an  eutirely  dif- 
ferent terminus  a  quo  for  the  sixty-nine  weeks, 
namely  B.C.  444,  the  alleged  first  year  of  Cyrus, 
whom  he  believes  to  have  Uved  in  the  fifth  in- 
stead of  the  sixth  century  before  Christ  (!  !). 
The  sixty-nine  weeks,  or  483  years,  intervened 
tween  that  year  and  Christ's  death  on  the  cross 
in  March,  A.D.  38;  (6)  by  Kliefotb,  who  goes 
back  to  the  mystictd  theory  of  reckoning,  and 
accordingly  extends  the  seven  weeks  from  the 
edict  of  Cyrus  in  B.C.  537  to  the  advent  of 
Christ,  regardless  of  the  fact  that  that  period 
does  not  consist  of  seven  weeks  of  years,  nor  o£ 
seven  centuries,  nor  of  any  cycle  whatever, 
whose  aggregate  of  years  is  divisible  by  seven 
— the  sixty-two  sevens  from  Christ  to  the  time 
of  the  great  apostacy,  or  of  the  antichrist  at  the 
end  of  earthly  history  (during  which  period  of 
indefinite  duration  the  church  is  to  be  "  built" 
and  "restored,"  or  brought  back  to  God),  and 
finally,  the  last  week  from  the  great  apostacy  to 
the  appearing  of  Christ,  the  last  judgment,  and 
the  consummation  of  the  world. 

D.  Hofmann,  Delitzsch,  Fuller,  Ebrard,  and 
Kranichfeld  [also  substantially  Keil]  adopt  the 
typically  Mesnianic  interpretation.  The  former 
three  also  favor  the  transposing  theory  followed 
by  Wieseler  (1846),  inasmuch  as  they  assign  to 
the  seven  weeks  of  years  a  placa  after  the  63  ■¥■ 
1  weeks.  They  reckon  the  latter  from  B.  C.  OOG 
or  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  to  the  time  of 
the  Maccabees  (and  more  particularly,  the  sixty- 
two  weeks  from  606-172.  and  the  one  week 
from  173-165),  regarding  the  events  of  the  a;ra 
of  the  Antiochian  persecution  and  the  Maccabae- 
an  revolt  as  types  and  preflgurations  of  the  his- 
tory of  the  founding  of  Christianity  ;  and  they 
describe  the  seven  weeks  of  years  as  a  period  of 
unmeasured  length,  whose  beginning  is  coinci- 
dent with  the  "  going  forth  of  the  word  to  build 
Jerusalem,"  i.e.,  with  the  first  preaching  of  the 
Gospel  in  the  time  of  Christ  and  the  apostles, 
while  their  end  is  connected  with  the  judgment 
of  the  world  and  the  advent  of  Christ !  There 
is  therefore,  on  this  theory,  a  "'  breaking  of  the 
thread,"  or  a  hiatus,  between  the   sixty  thre« 


212 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


and  the  seven  weeks  amounting  to  about  160- 
190  years,  and,  in  addition,  an  extension  of  the 
last  seven  weeks  into  periods  of  mysterious 
length  ;  in  other  words,  the  aid  of  inttrcidntiuii, 
and  of  mysitkal  enumtratlon  is  superadded  to 
that  of  transpositum  [of.  supra,  No.  4,  (2),  (3j, 
and  (t!)].  These  are  employed  at  least  by  Hof- 
mann  and  Delitzsch,  who  do  not  even  shrink 
from  the  venturous  experiment  of  amplifying 
the  seventy  weeks  into  quadratic  Sabbatic 
periods,*  whUe  Fuller,  more  soljer  and  consi- 
derate, but  assuredly  not  less  arbitrary,  inter- 
prets the  six  weeks  as  being  wholly  future,  and 
as  belonging  to  the  distant  end  of  the  world. 
He  endeavors  to  render  this  inordinate  hiatus 
conceivable  by  the  assumption  that  Daniel  saw 
the  post-Macedonian  antichrist,  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes,  and  the  post- Roman  antichrist  of  the 
last  times  perspectively  as  one. — Ebrard  avoids 
every  method  of  transposition,  but  does  not 
_  escape  violently  altering  the  text  (in  a  review  of 
Fiiller's  Daniel,  in  the  Guterslohe  Allgem.  liteiiir. 
Auzeiger,  Oct.,  1808,  p.  207,  and  earlier,  in  his 
Offenbarung  Johaniiis,  p.  07  et  seq.),  in  his  en- 
deavor to  demonstrate  the  typically  Messianic 
tense  of  the  passage.  Supported  by  the  ampli- 
fying version  of  the  Sept.  (see  supra.  No.  1),  he 
reads  D''":'£  in  v.  25  a  (soil.  S'??"-?),  instead 
of  niSjia,  or  he  asserts  that  a"'??".;  was  omitted 
after  C^ynii;  through  the  inadvertence  of  a 
copyist.  He  farther  holds  that  v.  24  states,  in 
general  terras  and  round  numbers,  that  seventy 
weeks  of  years  were  to  elapse  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  captivit}'  to  Christ,  and,  by  the  method 
described  above,  obtains  the  more  exact  state- 
ment in  V.  25,  that  7-h70  =  77  weeks  of  years 
should  intervene  between  the  edict  of  Cyrus 
(538;  and  Christ,  and  sixty-two  weeks  between 
the  building  of  the  city  "  with  street  and  wall  " 
by  Nehemiah  (B.  C.  440)  and  Christ  (six  years 
earlier  than  the  Christian  jera).  The  time  from 
Christ's  birth  to  his  death  or  the  thirty-five 
years  of  his  life  on  earth,  in  which  he  particu- 
larly includes  the  three  and  a  half  years  of  his 
official  activity,  are  conceived  by  him  as  the 
former  half  of  the  last  week,  the  whole  of 
which  is  said  to  be  a  ''  larger  mystical"  week; 
and  its  latter  half  ' '  reaches  to  the  mystical 
three  and  a  half  years  of  the  Apocalypse,  which 
e.'ctend  to  the  return  of  Christ." — Kranichfeld 
does  less  violence  to  the  text  than  any  of  those 
referred  to.  Avoiding  transposition,  parallel- 
isms, and  emendations,  he  reckons  the  first  seven 
weeks  of  years  from  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah, 
chap.  xxix. ,  and  from  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem in  B.C.  588  (cf.  supra,  on  v.  25),  the  sixty- 
two  weeks  from  the  end  of  the  former  seven  or 
the  time  of  Daniel's  vision  in  B.C.  539,  and  re- 
gards the  ~"j:  n''r'^i  ■y-  25,  who  stands  at  the 
beginning  of  the  sixty-two  weeks,  as  represent- 


•  Cf .  Delitzsch,  p.  284,  "  If  the  seventy  weeks  are  not  re- 
garded ft6  t^imple,  but  rather  as  quadrated  Sabbatic  periods, 
it  follows  that  70  X  4t*  or  34^i0  .years  are  to  intervene  be- 
tween the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  and  Christ,  whose  pani- 
Eia  is  considered  as  one  such  period.  Consequently,  if  .3,595 
years  be  added  to  that  aKffregate,  as  havincr  passed  from  the 
creation  to  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  the  suirKestive 
amount  will  result  in  about  TO^'O  years  (diminished  by  only 
twenty-five  years)  as  the  duration  of  the  world.  For  u 
triticism  of  this  view  cf.  Klicfoth,  p.  337  et  seq. 


ing  Cyrus,  whUe  the  n"C."73,  v.  26,  who  appcan 
at  their  close,  is  supposed  to  denote  Christ.  This 
theory  consequently  postulates  a  gap  of  more 
than  a  century  between  the  Maccabsean  period, 
which  bounds  the  sixty-two  weeks  (and  to  whose 
suiferings  the  prophetic  descriptions  of  v.  26  b 
and  27  refer),  and  the  time  of  Christ,  the  "  an- 
ointed one  who  was  to  be  cut  oif,"  v.  26  a, 
which  interval  was  unnoticed  by  the  prophet,  in 
harmony  with  the  law  of  perspective  vision.* 

The  assumption  of  this  interval  between  the 
close  of  the  sixty-two  weeks  and  the  opening  of 
the  New-Test,  aira  of  salvation  does  not  con- 
stitute the  feature  which  forms  our  only  objec- 
tion to  Kranichfeld's  theory  ;  for,  without  some 
such  interval  the  prophecy  would  lose  its  genu- 
inely prophetic  character,  and  instead  of  being 
an  idea]  description,  possessing  the  future,  it 
would  present  a  calculation  of  arithmetical  ex- 


*  [Keil  thus  classifies  the  various  interpretations:  *'l. 
Most  of  the  church  fathers  and  the  older  orthodox  interpre- 
ters find  prophesied  here  the  appearance  of  Chri.st  in  the 
flesh.  His  deatii,  and  the  destruction  of  Jei-usalem  by  the 
Romans.  This  view  is  in  our  time  fully  and  at  length  de- 
fended by  Hiivemick  ( Comvi.),  Hengstenberg  ( Chrislol.,  III. 
1,  p.  19  sq.,  2d  ed.),  and  Auberlen  {Der  Proph.  Dame!,  etc., 
p.  lO^j  sq.,  Sd  ed.),  and  is  adopted  also  by  the  Catholic 
theoloiriau  Laur.  Reinke  {Die  ifefifian.  We^fsag.  bti  rte»  gr. 
u.  kl.  't'roph.  des  A.  T.,  IV.  I,  p.  2U(i  s(].),  am'  by  Dr.  Pusi'y, 
of  England.  2.  The  majority  of  modem  (continental)  in- 
terpreters, on  the  other  hand,  refer  the  whole  passage  to  the 
time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  This  view  presents  it-self  in 
the  Alexandrian  translation  of  the  prophecy,  more  distinctly 
in  Jidius  Htlarianus  (about  A.D.  4UU)  ( Chronoivgia  s.  UbeUus 
tic  mundi  dutalione.  in  Jlipne's  Biltliolh.  cler.  vnh\,  t.  13, 
p.  1098),  and  in  several  rabbinical  interpreters,  but  was  first 
broufrht  into  special  notice  by  the  rationalistic  interpreters 
Eichhom,  Bertboldt,  v.  Lent'erke,  Maurer,  Ewald.  Hitzig, 
[Rosenmiiller].  and  the  mediating  theologians  Bleek.  Wies- 
eler  {/Me  70  M'ochen  u.  die  (j3  Jahricoclien  des  Proph. 
Daniel,  Giitt..  1839.  with  which  compare  the  retractaticn 
in  the  GiJUtnger.  Gel.  Anzeiger,  1840,  p.  113  sq.),  who 
arc  followed  by  Liicke,  Hilgenfeld,  Kranichfeld  [Stuart], 
and  othei-s.  This  verse  has  been  defended  byHofmann  {Die 
70  Ji'hre  rfeJ*  Jer.  u.  die  70  Jahrwochen  den  Daniel, 
Niirnb..  18;J6,  and  Wtitisag.  u.  ErfiUltntg,  as  also  in 
the  Hi-kriftbeic).  Delitzsch  (art.  Daniel  in  Herzog's  Real- 
enct/kl.  vol.  III.),  and  ZilndeHinthe  Ki  Uischen  UnlerSH.),  hut 
with  this  essential  modification,  that  Hofmann  and  Delitzsch 
have  united  an  eschatological  reference  to  the  primary  his- 
torical reference  of  vers.  25-87  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  in 
consequence  of  which  the  prophecy  will  be  perfectly  accom- 
plished only  in  the  appearance  of  antichrist  and  the  final 
comiiletion  of  the  kingdom  of  God  at  the  end  of  the  days. 
3.  Finally,  some  of  the  church  fathers  and  several  modem 
theologians  have  interpreted  the  prophecy  eschatologically, 
as  an  announcement  of  the  development  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  at  the  end  of  the  exile  on  to  the  perfecting  of  the  king- 
dom by  the  second  coming  of  Christ  at  the  end  of  the  days. 
Of  this  view  we  have  the  first  germs  in  Hippolj-tus  and  Apol- 
linaris  of  Laodicea,  who.  having  regard  to  the  prophecy 
of  .\ntichrist,  ch.  vii.  25,  refer  the  statement  of  ver.  27  "f 
this  chap,  regarding  the  last  week  to  the  cud  of  the  world, 
and  the  first  half  of  this  week  they  regard  as  the  time  of  the 
return  of  Elias,  the  second  halt  as  the  time  of  antichrist. 
This  view  is  for  the  first  time  definitely  stated  in  the  Berie- 
hura  Bible.  But  Kliefotb,  in  his  Comm.  on  Daniel,  was 
the  fii-sl  who  sought  to  investigate  and  establish  this  opinion 
e.xegetically,  and  Leyser  (in  Herzog's  Beulenc.,  XVIII..  p. 
.383)  has  thus  briefly  stated  it :  '  The  seventy  CI"  p:L".  i.e.,  the 

Koxpoi  of  Daniel  (ch.  ix.  24  sq.),  meastired  by  sevens,  withia 
which  the  whole  of  God's  plan  of  salvation  in  the  world  will 
be  completed,  are  a  symbolical  period  with  reference  to  the 
seventy  years  of  exile  prophesied  by  Jeremiah,  and  with  the 
accessory  notion  of  oecumenicity.  The  seventy  is  again 
divided  into  three  periods  :  into  seven  (till  (Christ),  sixty-two 
(till  the  aiJostasy  of  antichrist),  and  one,   2?^lw,  the  last 

world,  i:riii,  divided  into  2  x  3>i  times,  the  rise  and  fall  of  an- 
tichrist.' ''  With  the  last  view  Keil's  own  interpretation  es- 
sentially agrees.  The  great  objection  to  it  is  that  it  mixes 
the  literal  with  the  mystical  import  of  the  prophecy,  and 
fails  to  yield  any  exact  fulfilment  of  the  definite  uumberi 
of  the  text!. 


CHAP.  IX  1-27. 


213 


BctnesB  (cf.  tue  following  section.  No.  1).  Our 
difficulty  consists  in  the  circumstance  that  the 
■■  anointed  one  who  should  be  cut  off,"  t.  26  n, 
is  held  to  be  Jesus  Christ,  the  Messiah,  who  was 
exalted  through  humiliation  and  sufferings  to 
glory,  while  everything  subsequently  mentioned 
in  the  immediate  context  (the  "'prince"  who 
should  "destroy  the  city  and  the  sanctuary," 
the  '■  covenant  with  many  "  confirmed  by  him, 
the  interruption  of  the  sacrifice  and  oblation, 
the  introduction  of  the  abomination  of  desola- 
tion, and  the  judicial  punishment  of  the  de- 
Etroyer)  had  its  complete  historical  fulfilment 
in  the  events  of  the  period  of  persecution  and 
oppression  under  Antiochus,  and  serves  merely 
as  a  typical  illustration  of  the  times  of  suffering 
and  of  the  judgments  under  the  New  Covenant. 
The  continuity  of  the  prophetic  description  ap- 
pears to  be  painfully  broken  by  this  application 
of  V.  26  a  to  Christ,  when  the  predictions  of  v. 
26  b  and  v.  27  are  simultaneously  referred  [by 
Kranichfeld.  etc.]  to  the  Maccabaean  epoch.  In 
addition  to  this  contradiction  of  the  context, 
this  method  of  interpretation  involves  the  logical 
inconsequence  of  a  vacillation  between  the 
typical  and  the  direct  Messianic  theory  of  ex- 
position, or  of  an  obscure  intermixture  of  the 
prefigurative  and  the  antitypicaJ. 


EXCURSUS. 
(BY   THE   AMERICAN   BBVISOR.) 

[Identification  of  the  HUtorical   Periods   com- 
prised within  tJie  "  Seventy  Weeks"  in 
Daniel  ix.  34-27. 
Seventy  heptades  have  been  decreed  [to  tran- 
spire] upon  thy  nation,  and  upon  thy  holy  city, 
for  [entirely]   closing  the   [punishment  of]  sin, 
and  for  sealing   up   [the   retributive  sentence 

Last  Eeform  begun 
[late  in  Snmmer]  B.  C.  410. 


Edict  published  at 

Jerusalem, 

July,  B.  C.  459. 


against  their]  offences,  and  for  expiating  guiit. 
and    for  bringing    in    [the   state   of]   perpetual 
righteousness,  and  for  sealing  up  [the  verifica- 
tion of]  vision  and  prophet,  and  for  anointing 
Holy  of  Holies.     And  thou  shalt  know  and  con- 
i  sider  [that]  from  [the  time  of  the]  issuing  of  a 
,  command  for  restoring  and  building  [i.  e. ,  for  re- 
I  building]   Jerusalem  till   [the   coming  of]  Mes- 
siah priuce  [shall  intervene]  seven  heptades,  and 
sixty  and  two  heptades ;    [its]  street  shall  return 
j  and  be  built  [i.e.,  shall  be   rebuilt],  and  [its] 
j  fosse,  and  [that]  in  distress  of  the  times.     And 
I  after  the  sixty  and  two  heptades  Messiah  shall  be 
cut  off,  and  nothing  [shall  be  left]  to  him  ;  and 
people  of  the  coming  prince  shall  destroy  the 
city  and  the   holy   [building],  and  his  end   [of 
fighting  shall  come]  with  [or,  like]  the  flood,  and 
until  [the]  end  of  warring  [shall  occur  the]  de- 
crdt-d     [result]    of    desolations.     And    he    shall 
establish  a  covenant  for  the  many  [during]  one 
heptade,  and  [at  the]  middle  of  the  heptade  he 
shall  cause  to  cease  sacrifice  and  offering ;  and 
over  a  wing  [i.e.,  eagle  as  an  ensign]  of  abomi- 
nations [i.e.,  idolatrous  images],   [shall  preside 
the]  desolator,  and  [this  shall  continue]  till  com- 
pletion, and  a  decreed  [one  that]  shall  pour  out 
upon  [the]  desolate. 

I  have  been  unable  to  satisfy  myself  of  the  en- 
tire consistency  of  any  of  the  foregoing  interpre- 
tations of  this  remarkable  prophecy,  and  would 
therefore  propose  a  partly  new  elucidation,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  preceding  literal  translation 
and  the  following  diagram.  In  doing  this  I 
need  not  dwell  upon  the  minor  peculiarities  o£ 
phraseology,  which  have  been  fully  treated  al- 
ready. 

Christ  Baptized, 
August,  A.  D.  26. 


7w.  =49y.       1 

62  weeks  =  434  years. 

1  w.  =  7  y. 

70  heptades  =  490  years. 

6»X  years. 

62  weeks  =  434  years. 

Half  *. 

JeicK  rejected, 

September, 

A.  D.  32. 


R<ifoi-m  Completed, 
learly  in  Spring]  B.  C.  405. 


Christ  Sacrificed, 
March  18,  A.  D.  29. 


Sequel. — Jemaalem  razed  by  the  Romans,  A.  D.  70. 


In  verse  24  we  have  a  general  view  of  the  last 
great  period  of  the  Jewish  Church  (see  the  mid- 
dle line  in  the  diaijrmn).  It  was  to  embrace 
four  hundred  and  ninety  years,  from  their  per- 
manent release  from  Babylonian  bondage,  till 
the  time  when  God  would  finally  cast  them  off 
for  their  incorrigible  unbelief.  Within  this  space 
Jehovah  would  fulfil  what  he  had  predicted, 
and  accomplish  all  his  designs  respecting  them 
under  their  special  relation.  The  particulars 
noted  in  this  cursory  surve.v  are,  first,  the  con- 
clusion of  the  then  existing  exile  (expressed  in 


three  variations,  of  whlr.h  the  la.st  'phraso,  "  ti 
piating  guilt,"  explains  the  two  former,  "i?lo* 
ing  the  sin  "  and  "  sealing  up  offences ;  ")  naxl 
the  fulfilment  of  ancient  prophecy,  by  u»h<srin]^ 
in  the  religious  prosperity  of  Gospel  kiines  ;  and, 
lastly,  as  the  essential  feature,  the  consecration 
of  the  Messiah  to  his  redeeming  office. 

The  only  "  command  "  answering  to  that  of 
verse  25  is  that  of  Artaxerxes  Longiraanus,  is- 
sued in  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign,  and  re- 
corded in  the  seventh  chapter  of  E/.ra,  as  Pri- 
deanx  has  abundantly  shown,  and  as  many  cri 


214 


THE  PROPHET  DANTEL. 


lies  agree.  At  this  time,  also,  more  Jews  re- 
turned to  their  home  than  at  any  other,  and  the 
iiter.al  as  well  as  spiritual  "  rebuilding  of  Jeru- 
salem "  was  prosecuted  with  unsurpassed  vigor. 
The  period  here  referred  to  e.Ktends  "till  the 
Messiah"  (see  the  upper  line  of  the  duiynim); 
that  is.  as  far  as  his  public  recognition  as  such 
Ijy  the  Voice  at  his  baptism,  the  ■"anointing "  of 
the  previous  verse;  and  not  to  his  death, — as  is 
commonly  supposed,  but  which  is  afterward  re- 
ferred to  in  very  different  language ;  nor  to  his 
hlrth — which  would  make  the  entire  compa.ss  of 
the  prophecy  vary  much  from  fourliundred  and 
ninety  years.  The  period  of  this  verse  is  dirided 
into  two  portions  of  "seven  heptades "  and 
"sixty-two  heptades,"  as  if  the  "command" 
from  which  it  dates  were  renewed  at  the  end  of 
the  first  portion  ;  and  this  we  find  was  the  case. 
Ezra,  under  whom  this  reformation  of  the  St.ate 
and  religion  began,  was  succeeded  in  the  work 
by  Xehemiah,  who,  having  occasion  to  return  to 
Persia  in  the  twenty-fifth  year  after  the  com- 
mencement of  the  work  (Neil.  xiii.  0),  returned 
''  after  certain  days,"  and  found  that  it  ha8  so 
far  retrograded  that  he  was  obliged  to  institute 
it  anew.  The  length  of  his  stay  at  court  is  not 
given,  but  it  must  have  been  considerable  to  al- 
low so  great  a  backsliding  among  the  lately  re- 
formed Jews.  Prideaux  contends  that  his  return 
to  Judaja  was  after  an  absence  of  twenty-four 
years ;  *  and  I  have  supposed  the  new  reform 
then  set  on  foot  by  him  to  have  occupied  a  little 
over  three  years,  which  is  certainly  none  too 
much  time  for  the  task  (see  the  lower  line  of 
the  (liiigrmn).  The  "rebuilding  of  the  streets 
and  intrenchments  in  times  of  distress "  seems 
to  refer,  in  its  literal  sense,  to  the  former  part 
sspecially  of  the  forty -nine  years  (compare  Ne- 
hemiah  iv. ),  very  little  having  been  previously 
done  towards  rebuilding  the  citi/,  although 
former  decrees  had  been  issued  for  repairing  the 
temple  ;  f  and,  in  its  spiritual  import,  it  applies 
to  the  whole  time,  and  peculiarly  to  the  three 
years  of  the  last  refonn. 

The  "sixty-two  weeks"  of  verse  3(),  be  it  ob- 
served, are  not  said  to  commence  at  the  end  of 
the  "seven  weeks"  of  verse  25,  but,  in  more 
gener.al  terms,  after  the  " distres.siug  times" 
during  which  the  reform  was  going  on  ;  hence, 
they  properly  date  from  the  end  of  that  reform, 
when  things  became  permanently  settled.  It  is 
in  consequence  of  a  failure  to  notice  this  varia- 
tion in  the  limits  of  the  two  periods  of  sixty-two 
weeks  referred  to  by  the  prophet  (comp.are  the 
middle  portions  of  the  upper  and  of  the  lower 
line  in  the  dingram)  that  critics  have  thrown 
the  whole  scheme  of  this  prophecy  into  disorder 
in  applying  to  the  same  event  such  irreconcilable 
language  as  is  used  in  describing  some  of  its 
different  elements.  By  the  ravaging  invasion  of 
foreigners  here  foretold,  is  manifestly  intended 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Roman 
troops,  whose  emperor's  son,  Titus,  is  here 
styled  a  "  prince  "  in  command  of  them.     The 


•  [Sec  the  ftrguments  in  his  Connection,  .sub  anno  409.  I 
pla<-'e  the  whole  prophecy  ji  year  earlier.] 

+  [Namely,  liy  Cynis.  the  Sledo-Persaian  conqueror  of  the 
Babylonians,  w  ho  thus  ])ut  an  end  to  the  ''  seventy  years*  cap- 
tivity,"' B.  C.  5^^6,  as  in  Ezra  i.  1  ;  and  by  Darin*  Hystaspis, 
who  renewed  Cyrus's  decree  (Ezra  iv.  24),  B.C.  518, "rescind- 
ing its  prohibition  by  his  Immediate  predeceaaors  Cambyacs 
and  Smcrdia.] 


same  allusion  is  also  clear  from  the  latter  part 
of  the  following  verse.  l!ut  thi.s  event  must  not 
be  included  within  the  seventy  weeks  ;  because, 
in  the  first  jilace,  the  accomplishment  wouhl  not 
sustain  such  a  view, — from  tlic  decree,  B.  C. 
4o9,  to  the  de.structiou  of  Jerusalem.  A.  D.  70. 
being  five  hundred  and  twenty-eight  years ; 
secondly,  the  langu.age  of  verse  24  docs  not  re- 
quire it, — as  it  is  not  embraced  in  the  ]mrp(>sus 
for  which  the  seventy  weeks  are  there  stated  to 
be  appointed  to  Jerusalem  and  its  inhabitants  ; 
and,  lastly,  the  Jews  then  no  longer  formed  a 
link  in  the  chain  of  eoclesia.stical  history  in  the 
Divine  sense, — Christian  believers  having  be- 
come the  true  descendants  of  Abraham.  At  the 
close  of  the  verse  we  have  the  judgments  with 
which  God  would  afflict  the  Jews  for  cutting  off 
the  Messiah  :  these  woiUd  be  so  severe,  that  the 
prophet  (or,  rather,  the  angel  instructing  him) 
cannot  refrain  from  introducing  them  here,  in 
connection  with  that  event,  although  he  after- 
wards adverts  to  them  in  their  proper  order. 
What  these  sufferings  were,  Josephus  narrates 
with  a  minuteness  that  chills  the  blood,  afford- 
ing a  wonderful  coincidence  with  the  prediction 
of  Moses  in  Deut.  xxviii.  15-68  ;  they  are  here 
called  a  ""flood,"  the  well-known  Scripture  em- 
blem of  terrible  political  calamities  (as  in  Isa. 
viii.  7,  8  ;  Dan.  xi.  10,  22 ;   N.ih.  i.  8). 

Verse  27  has  g  ven  the  greatest  trouble  tu 
critics  of  any  in  the  whole  passage  ;  and,  indeed, 
the  common  theorj-,  by  which  the  seventy  weeks 
are  made  to  end  with  the  crucifixion,  is  flatly 
contradicted  by  the  cessation  of  the  daily  sacri- 
ficial offerings  at  the  temple,  ""  in  the  middle  of 
the  week."  AH  attempts  to  crowd  aside  this 
point  are  in  vain ;  for  such  an  abolition  could 
not  be  said  to  occur  in  any  pertinent  sense  before 
the  offering  of  the  Great  Sacrifice.  e.specially 
as  Jesus  him.self,  during  his  ministry,  always 
countenanced  their  celebration.  Besides,  the 
advocates  of  this  scheme  are  obliged  to  make 
this  last  "  week  "  encroach  upon  the  preceding 
"sixty-two  weeks,"  so  as  to  include  John  the 
Baptist's  ministry,  in  order  to  make  out  seven 
years  for  "confirming  the  covenant ;  "  and  when 
they  have  done  this  they  run  counter  to  the  pre- 
vious explicit  direction,  which  makes  the  first 
sixty-nine  weeks  come  down  ""  io  the  Messiah." 
and  not  end  at  John.  By  means  of  the  double 
line  of  dates  exhibited  in  the  above  diagram,  all 
this  is  harmoniously  adjusted  ;  and  at  the  same 
time  the  only  satisfactory  interpretation  is  re- 
tained, that  after  the  true  Atonement,  these 
typical  oblations  ceased  to  have  any  meaning  or 
efficacy,  although  before  it  they  could  not  con- 
sistently be  dispensed  with,  even  by  Christ  and 
his  Apostles. 

The  seventy  weeks,  therefore,  were  allotted 
to  the  Jews  as  their  only  season  of  favor  or 
mercy  as  a  Church,  .and  we  know  that  they  were 
not  immediately  cast  off  upon  their  murder  of 
Christ  (see  Luke  xxiv.  27;  Acts  iii.  12-2fi). 
The  gospel  was  specially  directed  to  be  first 
preached  to  them  ;  and  not  only  during  our 
Saviour's  personal  ministry,  but  for  several  years 
afterward,  the  invitations  of  grace  were  confined 
to  them.  The  first  instance  of  a  ""turning  to 
the  Gentiles "  proper  w.is  the  baptism  of  the 
Roman  centurion  Cornelius,  during  the  fourth 
year  after  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  In  this 
interval  the  Jewish  people  had  shown  their  de- 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27 


215 


twrmiueii  opposition  to  the  New  "  Covenant " 
by  imprisouing  the  Apostles,  stoning  Stephen 
to  death,  and  otficially  proscribing  Christian- 
ity through  their  Sanhedrim  :  soon  after  this 
martyrdom  occurred  the  conversion  of  Saul, 
who  ■•  was  a  chosen  vessel  to  bear  God's  name 
to  the  Gentiles  "  :  and  about  two  years  after 
this  event  the  door  was  thrown  wide  open  for 
their  admission  into  the  covenant  relation  of  the 
church,  instead  of  the  Jews,  by  the  vision  of 
Peter  and  the  conversion  of  Cornelius.  Here 
ne  find  a  marked  epoch,  fixed  by  the  finger  of 
God  in  all  the  miraculous  circumstances  of  the 
event,  as  well  as  by  the  formal  apostolical 
decree,  ratifying  it,  and  obviously  forming  the 
great  turning-point  between  the  two  dispen- 
sations. We  find  no  evidence  that  "many" 
of  the  Jews  embraced  ChrLstianity  after  this 
period,  although  they  had  been  converted  in 
great  numbers  on  several  occasions  under  the 
Apostles'  preaching,  not  only  in  Judiea,  but  also 
iu  Galilee,  and  even  among  the  semi-Jewish  in- 
habitants of  Samaria  ;  the  Jews  had  now  reject- 
ed Christ  as  a  nation  with  a  tested  and  incon-i- 
gible  hatred,  and,  having  thus  disowned  their 
God,  they  were  forsaken  by  him,  and  devoted 
to  destruction,  as  the  prophet  intimates  would 
be  their  retribution  for  that  "decision."  in 
which  the  four  hundred  and  ninety  years  of  this 
their  second  and  last  probation  in  the  Promised 
Land  would  result.  It  is  thus  strictly  true  that 
Christ,  personally  and  by  his  Apostles,  "  estab- 
lished the  covenant,"  which  had  formerly  been 
made,  and  was  now  renewed,  with  maiiti  of  the 
chosen  people,  for  precisely  seven  years  after 
his  pullic  appear.ince  as  a  Teacher;  in  the  very 
middle  of  which  space  He  superseded  forever  the 
sacrificial  offerings  of  the  Slosaic  ritual  by  the 
one  perfect  and  sufficient  OfEering  of  His  own 
body  on  the  cross. 

In  the  latter  part  of  this  verse  we  have  a 
graphic  outline  of  the  terrible  catastrophe  that 
should  fall  upon  the  Jews,  in  consequence  of 
their  rejection  of  the  Messiah  ;  a  desolation  that 
should  not  cease  to  cover  them,  but  by  the 
extinction  of  the  oppressed  nation  ;  it  forms  an  , 
appendix  to  the  main  prophecy.  Our  Saviour's 
language  leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  application 
of  this  passage,  in  His  memorable  warning  to 
His  disciples,  that  when  they  should  be  about 
to  "  see  the  abomination  of  desolation  spoken  of 
by  Daniel  the  prophet,  stand  in  the  holy  place." 
they  should  then  "flee  into  the  mountains" 
(Matt.  xxiv.  1.5.  10  ;  comp.  xxiii.  'iV>.  oS),  in  order 
to  save  themselves  from  that  awful  ^'  cvitsiitiana- 
tioti "  of  ruin,  which  he  also  pointed  out  as  the 
"  determined "  fate  of  that  impenitent  city, 
after  it  should  have  endured  the  "  desolating  " 
ravages  of  a  siege  unparalleled  in  rigor  and  suf- 
fering, besides  being  "left  desolate"  by  the 
ab.iadonment  of  their  God.  The  destined  peri- 
od of  fulfilment  arrived,  and  Josephus,  who  wit- 
nessed it,  tells  us  that  the  standards  of  the 
Roman  army,  who  held  sacred  the  shrined  silver 
eagles  that  surmounted  their  banners,  were 
actually  placed,  during  the  capture,  in  the  tem- 
ple, opposite  the  eastern  gate,  and  there  sacri- 
ficed to  {De  Bell.  Jud.,  VI.  li,  1).  Equally  exact, 
if  the  view  proposed  above  is  correct,  are  all  the 
Bpecifications  of  this  wonderful  prophecy. 

In  ths  preceding  in  vestigation  several  chrono- 
logical   points   have    been    partially   assumed. 


which  entire  satisfaction  with  the  results  ob- 
tained would  require  to  be  fully  proved.  A 
minute  investigation  of  the  grounds  on  which 
all  the  dates  involved  rest  would  occupy  too 
much  space  for  the  present  discus.sion  ;  I  shall, 
therefore,  content  myself  with  determining  the 
two  boundary  dates  of  the  entire  period,  truso 
ing  the  intennediate  ones  to  such  incidental 
evidences  of  their  correctness  as  ma.v  have  beeri 
afforded  in  the  foregoing  elucidation,  or  may 
arise  in  connection  with  the  settlement  pro- 
posed. *  If  these  widely  distant  points  can  be 
fi-xed  by  definite  data  independently  of  each 
other,  the  correspondence  of  the  iiiterfal  will 
afford  strong  presumption  that  it  is  the  true 
one,  which  will  be  heightened  as  the  subdivi- 
sions fall  naturally  into  their  prescribed  limits  ; 
and  thus  the  above  coincidence  m  the  character 
of  the  eeents  vriU  receive  all  the  confirmation 
that  the  nature  of  the  case  admits. 

1.  The  date  of  the  Edict.  I  have  supposed 
this  to  be  from  the  time  of  its  taking  effect  at 
Jeru.salem,  rather  than  from  that  of  its  nominal 
issue  at  Babylon  ;  the  difference,  however, — 
being  only  foui-  months, — will  not  seriously 
affect  the  argument.  ■  Ezra  states  (chap.  vii. 
8),  that  "he  arrived  at  Jerusalem  in  the  fifth 
month  (Ab,  our  July-August)  of  the  seventh 
year  of  the  king "  Artaxerxes.  Ctesias,  who 
had  every  opportunity  to  know,  makes  Arta- 
xerxes to  have  reigned  forty-two  years,  and 
Thucydides  states  that  an  Athenian  embassy, 
sent  to  Ephesus  in  the  winter  that  closed  the 
seventh  year  of  the  Peloponnesian  war,  was 
there  met  with  the  news  of  Artaxer.xes'  death, 
n-i'iiuutj'oi  .  .  .  ^Apra^tji^riv  .  .  .  i^fwffri  r£ih'//K6~a 
{narii  ••jttf)  Toi'TOD  tuv  xi'^'V'*^  irt'/ €i'T?/ctT)^  Sell. 
Ffloj).,  IV  50.  Now  this  war  began  in  the 
spring  of  B.C.  4ijl,  as  all  allow  (Thuc.  ii.  2), 
and  its  seventh  year  exph'ed  with  the  spring  of 
B.C.  424  ;  consequently,  Artaxerxes  died  in  the 
winter  introducing  that  ye.ar,  and  his  reign 
began  some  time  in  B.C.  4(50.  This  latter  his- 
torian also  states  that  Themistocles,  in  his  flight 
to  Asia,  having  I  een  driven  by  a  storm  into  the 
Athenian  fleet,  at  that  time  blockading  Naxos, 
managed  to  get  safely  carried  away  to  Ephesus, 
whence  he  dispatched  a  letter  of  solicitation  to 
Artaxerxes,  then  lately  invested  witli  royalty. 
reuari  .iani'/e,  oira  [lidl.  Peli/p.,  I.  loT).  The 
date  of  the  conquest  of  that  island  is  B.C.  40(5, 
which  is,  therefore,  also  that  of  the  Per.sian 
king's  accession.  It  is  now  necessary  to  fix  the 
senxon  of  the  year  in  which  he  became  king.  If 
Ctesias  means  that  his  reign  lasted  forty-two 
full  years,  or  a  little  over  rather  than  under 
that  length  the  accession  must  be  dated  prior 
to  the  beginning  of  B.C.  400  ;  but  it  is  more  in 
accordance  with  the  usual  computation  of  reigns 
to  give  the  number  of  current  years,  if  nearly 
full,  and  this  will  bring  the  d;i^e  of  accession 
down  to  about  the  beginning  of  summer,  B  C. 
406.  This  result  is  also  more  in  accordance 
with  the  simultaneous  capture  of  Naxos,  which 
can  hardly  have  occurred  earlier  in  that  year. 
I  may  add,  that  it  likewise  explains  the  length 
assigned  to  this  reign  (forty-one  years)  by  Ptol- 
emy, in  his  Astrouomiceil  Canon,  although  ha 
has  misled  mi  dern  compilers  of  ancient  history 


•  rOn  the^e  chronoloeical  elements,  see  Browne's  Ordo 
Sacloritm,  p]i.  iVi  and  9(i-107.1 


2]  6 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


by  beginning  it  in  B.C.  465.  having  apparently 
himself  fallen  into  some  confusion,  from  silently 
annexing  the  short  intermediate  periods  of  an- 
archy sometimes  to  the  preceding  and  at  others 
to  the  ensuing  reign.  The  ".seventh  year"  of 
Artaxerxes.  therefore,  began  about  the  summer 
of  B.C.  400,  and  the  "first  [Hebrew]  month" 
(Nisan)  occurring  within  that  twelvemonth, 
gives  the  foUowing  March-April  of  B.C.  4.39 
as  the  time  when  Ezra  received  his  commission 
to  proceed  to  Jerusalem  for  the  purpose  of  exe- 
cuting the  royal  mandate. 

2.  T/ie  date  of  the  conversion  of  Cornelius. 
The  solution  of  this  question  will  be  the  deter- 
mination of  the  distance  of  this  event  from  the 
time  of  our  Saviour's  Passion ;  the  absolute 
date  of  this  latter  occurrence  must,  therefore, 
first  be  determined.  This  is  ascertained  to  have 
taken  place  in  A.D.  29,  by  a  comparison  of  the 
duration  of  Christ's  ministry  with  the  historical 
data  of  Luke  iii.  1-23  ;  but  the  investigation  is 
too  long  to  be  inserted  here.  (See  Dr.  Jarvis'e 
Introduction  to  the  History  of  the  Church.)  A 
ready  mode  of  testing  this  conclusion  is  by  ob- 
serving that  this  is  the  only  one  of  the  adjacent 
series  of  years  in  which  the  calcirlated  date  of 
the  equinoctial  full  moon  coincides  with  that  of 
the  Friday  of  the  crucifixion  Passover,  as  any 
.  one  may  see — with  sufficient  accuracy  for  ordi- 
nary purposes — by  computing  the  mean  luna- 
tions and  week-day  back  from  the  present  time. 
This  brings  the  date  of  Chnst's  baptism  to  A.  D. 
25  ;  and  the  whole  tenor  of  the  Gospel  narra- 
tives indicates  that  this  took  place  in  the  latter 
part  of  summer.  Other  more  definite  criteria 
of  the  season  cannot  be  specified  here. 

The  chief  chronological  difBculties  of  the  Acts 
occur  in  the  arrangement  of  the  events  associ- 
ated with  Cornelius's  conversion,  and  arise  from 
the  vague  notes  of  time  (or,  rather,  absence  of 
any  definite  dates)  by  Luke,  between  the  account 
of  the  Pentecostal  effusion  (chap.  ii.  1)  and  the 
death  of  Herod  Agrippa  the  elder  (chap.  xii.  23) ; 
indeed,  but  for  the  periods  noted  by  Paul  in 
Gal.  i.  and  ii.  it  would  be  utterly  impossible  to 
adjust  minutely  the  dates  of  this  portion  of  the 
history.  As  it  is,  the  subject  is  almost  aban- 
doned by  most  chronologers  and  commentators 
as  hopelessly  obscure  and  uncertain  ;  but  there 
is  no  occasion  for  such  despair.  The  death  of 
Herod  is  ascertained  (by  the  help  of  Josephus. 
Antig..  XIX.  8,  2)  to  have  occurred  in  the  early 
part  of  the  year  A.D.  44,  between  which  time 
and  the  Pentecost  of  A.D.  29  is  an  interval  of  fif- 
teen years,  covered  by  the  incidents  contained  in 
chapters  ii.-xi.  of  the  Acts.  The  visit  of  Paul, 
Bpokeu  of  by  him  as  his  second  to  Jerusalem 
(Gal.  ii.  1),  appears  at  first  sight  to  be  the  same 
with  that  narrated  in  Acts  ii.  30.  since  there  is 
no  mention  of  any  intervening  visit ;  it  was 
made  in  company  with  Barnabas,  and  the 
■•  revelation  "  (Gal.  ii.  2)  might  answer  to  the 
prediction  of  the  famine  by  Agabus  (Acts  xi.  28),  j 
which  caused  the  journey.  Now  in  that  case  it 
is  certain  that  the  date  of  this  visit  ("  fourteen 
years  after")  is  not  reckoned  from  that  of  his 
former  visit  (Gal.  t  18),  for  then  it  would  have 
occurred  at  lea.st  seventeen  years  (144-3)  after 
liis  conversion,  which  would  be  two  years  more 
than  the  whole  interval  between  this  second  visit 
and  the  Pentecost  referred  to ;  it  is,  therefore, 
reckoned  from  his  conversion,  which  mikes  his 


journey  to  Damascus,  on  which  he  was  converted 
occur  one  year  (15 — 14)  after  this  Pentecost. 
This  is  corroborated  by  two  ancient  ecclesiastical 
traditions,  one  of  which  states  that  Paul  was 
converted  in  the  year  after  the  Ascension,  and 
the  other  refers  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen 
(which  was  so  connected  with  Paul's  persecuting 
journey  to  Damascus,  as  not  to  have  preceded  it 
many  months)  to  the  close  of  the  same  year  in 
which  Christ  suffered.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
as  the  best  authorities  mostly  agree,  the  second 
visit  spoken  of  in  Gal.  corresponds  with  that  de 
scribed  in  Acts  xv.,  as  the  similarity  of  the  sub- 
ject debated  at  the  time  (the  obligation  of 
Mosaism)  especially  indicates,  then  we  are  at 
liberty  to  apply  the  natural  interpretation  to  the 
intervals  there  given,  and  we  shall  thus  have 
the  visit  in  question  occurring  seventeen  years 
after  the  conversion  of  Paul.  Now,  the  date  of 
the  visit  referred  to  in  Acts  xii.  is  known  to  be 
A.D.  44,  and  if  we  allow  the  reasonable  space 
of  three  years  for  the  first  missionary  journey, 
as  recorded  in  the  intervening  chapters  (Acts 
xiii. ,  xiv. ),  and  the  considerable  stay  at  Antioch 
upon  its  close  (xiv.  28),  we  shall  stUl  have,  as 
before,  an  interval  of  one  year  between  the 
Crucifixion  and  Paul's  conversion — a  space,  for 
all  that  we  can  see,  sufficiently  ample  for  the 
events  related. 

Paul's  first  visit  (Gal.  i.  8)  must  naturally  be 
reckoned  in  like  manner  from  his  conversion,  as 
it  is  mentioned  to  show  the  length  of  his  stay 
in  Damascus  and  its  vicinity,  and  is  put  in  con- 
trast with  his  intentional  avoidance  of  Jerusa- 
lem on  his  conversion  (ver.  17) ;  we  have  thus 
the  date  of  this  same  visit  in  Acts  ix.  2(i  fixed 
at  A.D.  33,  four  years  after  the  noted  Pente- 
cost. I  need  not  here  discuss  the  length  nor 
precise  time  of  the  visit  into  Arabia  (Gal.  i.  17), 
nor  the  exact  mode  of  adjusting  this  passage 
with  Luke's  account  in  the  Acts  ;  these  points 
are  capable  of  easy  solution,  and  do  not  require 
the  supposition  of  some  intervening  visit  in 
either  narrative.  Neither  need  I  stop  to  recon- 
cile the  mention  of  travels  in  Syria  (Gal.  i.  21) 
with  the  sea  voyage  direct  from  Cassarea  to  Tar- 
sus (Acts  ix.  30)  ;  the  visit  to  Jerusalem  occu- 
pied only  fifteen  days  (Gal.  i.  18),  and  there  is 
nothing  here  to  disturb  the  above  dates. 

Most  chronological  schemes,  blindly  following 
the  order  of  Acts  ix.  and  x..  without  taking  into 
special  consideration  this  interval  of  three  years 
spent  by  Paul  at  Damascus,  have  placed  the 
conversion  of  Cornelius  after  that  apostle's  re- 
turn to  Tarsus,  the  arrangers  being  apparently 
actuated  by  a  desire  to  fill  up  the  period  of  fif- 
teen years  by  sprinkling  the  events  along  as 
widely  apart  as  possible  for  the  sake  of  uniform 
intervals.  But  several  considerations  present 
themselves  to  my  mind  which  cause  me  to  think 
this  arrangement  erroneous.  In  the  outset,  the 
question  arises  on  this  supposition.  What  were 
the  other  apostles  doing  these  three  years  ?  Was 
nothing  going  on  at  Jerusalem  or  in  Judfea  worth 
recording?  But  this  interval  is  not  thus  left  a 
blank  by  the  sacred  historian.  Luke  says  (Acts 
ix.  31),  "Then  had  the  churches  rest,"  etc.  ; 
that  is,  as  I  understand  it,  during  these  three 
years,  the  persecution  stirred  up  by  Saul  aftei 
the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  being  an-ested  bj 
the  conversion  of  that  enemy,  the  Christian 
societies  generally  enjoyed  ^eat  quiet  and  proB 


CHAr.  IX.  1-27. 


217 


penty.  I  cannot  discover  any  pertinent  cause 
for  this  remark,  unless  we  suppose  it  to  refer  to 
the  period  succeeding  this  event.  The  same 
idea  is  carried  by  the  mention  of  the  travels  of 
Peter  "  through  all  parts  "  (verse  3'J),  evidently 
during  this  season  of  outward  peace,  when  his 
presence  was  no  longer  needed  to  sustain  the 
Church  at  Jerusalem.  It  was  during  this  tour 
that  Peter  was  called  to  preach  the  Gospel  to 
Cornelius ;  the  year  succeeding  the  conversion 
o'  Saul  was  probably  spent  by  Peter  in  building 
up  the  society  at  the  metropolis,  his  tour  appar- 
ently occupied  the  summer  of  the  year  follow- 
ing ;  and  in  the  third  year  Paul,  on  his  visit  to 
Jerusalem,  finds  Peter  returned  thither.  This 
affords  convenient  time  for  all  these  occurrences, 
and  connects  them  in  their  natural  order. 
Lastly,  under  this  view  we  can  readily  explain 
the  plan  of  Luke's  narrative  in  these  chapters: 
after  tracing  the  history  of  the  Church  (specially 
under  the  conduct  of  Peter)  down  to  the  perse- 
cution by  Saul,  he  takes  up  the  subject  of  this 
opponent's  conversion,  and  does  not  quit  him 
until  he  has  left  him  in  quiet  at  home — hence 
his  omission  of  all  reference  to  these  three  years 
as  being  unsuitable  to  his  design  of  continuity  ; 
he  then  returns  to  Peter,  and  narrates  his  doings 
in  the  interim.  This  parallel  method  of  narra- 
tion is  proved  by  the  resumption  of  Paul's  his- 
tory in  chapter  xi.  19,  where  Luke  evidently 
goes  back  to  the  time  of  Stephen,  in  order  to 
show  wliat  the  dispersed  evangelists  had  been 
accomplishing  during  the  four  years  succeeding 
that  martyrdom,  and  thus  connect  the  preach- 
ing to  the  Gentiles  with  the  latter  part  of  that 
period  (ver.  20 1  ;  and  this  again  prepares  the 
way  for  the  visit  to  Antioch  of  Paul,  who  had 
lately  returned  to  Tareus.  j 

Ic  is  true,  in  this  scheme  there  is  made  an 
interval  of  ten  years  between  the  establishment 
of  the  Church  at  Antioch  and  the  visit  of  Paul 
to  Jerusalem,  about  the  time  of  Herod's  death  ; 
but  it  is  much  better  to  place  such  an  interval, 
during  which  no  incident  of  striking  moment 
occurred,  after  the  Gospel  had  become  in  a 
measure  rooted  in  the  community,  than  to  inter- 
sperse considerable  periods  of  uninteresting 
silence  in  its  early  planting,  when  matters 
which,  had  they  transpired  afterward,  would  be 
passed  by  as  trivial,  were  of  the  greatest  impor- 
tance in  the  history.  Intimations  are  given 
of  the  general  prosperity  of  the  cause,  and 
there  was  no  occasion  to  present  the  de- 
tails of  this  period,  until  some  remarkable 
event  broke  the  even  course  of  occurrences. 
Such  an  event  was  the  visit  of  Paul,  and  espe- 
cially the  contemporaneous  conduct  and  fate  of 
Herod  ;  and  the  latter  account  is  accordingly 
introduced  in  the  twelfth  chapter  by  the  phrase, 
K«r'  tKttvov  ds  Tov  naipoi',  always  indicative  of 
some  fresh  occurrence  after  a  period  of  compar- 
ative monotony  and  silence.  Nor  is  this  in- 
terval left  entirely  devoid  of  incident ;  it  is  in 
fact  filled  up  by  the  account  of  the  preparation 
for  the  famine.  It  was  "  during  those  days  " 
that  the  prophet  Agabus  visited  Antioch  from 
Jerusalem  ;  some  time  after  his  arrival,  he  pre- 
dicted the  famine,  and  it  is  plainly  intimated 
that  the  fulfilment  did  not  take  place  immedi- 
ately, but  several  years  afterward,  "  in  the  days 
of  Claudius  Casar."  Tnat  emperor,  therefore, 
was  not  reigning  at  the  time  of  its  utterance, 


and  as  the  famine  took  place  in  the  fourth  year 
of  his  reign  (Josephus,  Ant..  XX.  5,  2,  compared 
with  I.  2),  there  is  here  an  interval  of  at  least 
four  years  sUeutly  occurring  between  two  closely 
related  incidents  of  this  period.-  The  '-whole 
year  "  during  which  Paul  preached  at  Antioch 
(Acts  xi.  26)  is  reckoned  from  his  call  thither  by 
Barnabas,  but  does  not  extend  to  his  visit  to 
Jerusalem  ;  it  only  covers  his  first  labors  con- 
fined to  the  city  itself  (after  which  he  itinerated 
in  the  neighboring  regions  of  Syria,  Gal.  i.  21), 
and  extends  merely  to  about  the  time  of  the 
arrival  of  Agabus.  The  above  interval  of  ten 
years  was  occupied  by  Paul  in  such  labors  as  are 
referred  to  in  2  Cor.  xi.  23-27. 

We  thus  arrive  at  the  conclusion,  based  upon 
internal  evidence,  that  the  admission  of  the 
Gentiles  by  the  conversion  of  Cornelius  occurred 
near  the  close  of  Peter's  summer  tour,  in  A.  D. 
32  ;  we  cannot  be  far  from  certainty  in  fixing  it 
as  happening  in  the  month  of  September  of  that 
year.] 

ETHICO-FUNDAMES'TAL  PRINCIPLES  RELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLO- 
GETICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETRAL 
SUGGESTIONS. 

1.  A  truly  unbiassed  apprehension  of  the 
sense  of  the  prophecy  respecting  the  seventy 
weeks  of  years  will  succeed  in  demonstrating 
a  typical  reference  to  the  Messiah  only  rather 
than  any  direct  allusion.  *  The  general  charac- 
ter of  the  language  in  the  introductory  passage, 
V.  24,  opens  a  prospect,  indeed,  of  events  such 
as  are  elsewhere  foretold  only  in  prophecies  that 
are  directly  Messianic  in  their  nature ;  but  these 
events  are  here  assigned  to  a  time  immediiitdy 
mbneqxtent  to  the  end  of  tlie  seventy  ioeeks  of 
years,  which  are  made  to  begin  with  Jeremiah's 
121  concerning  the  seventy  years,  or  at  about 
the  commencement  of  the  captivity  (B.C.  GOO 
or  588).  The  prophet  consequently  saw  the 
Messianic  period  of  deliverance  in  a  much  closer 
proximity  than  its  actual  distance  from  his  time 
would  justify,  and  he  connected  it  intimately 
with  the  aera  of  persecution  under  the  Seleucidae, 
which  he  saw  in  spirit  as  the  closing  period  of 
the  series  of  seventy  sevens  of  years,  as  pro- 
phetically revealed  to  him.  The  theocratic  seer, 
who  could  not  calculate  by  centuries,  but  only 
by  Sabbatic  periods  or  cycles  of  jubilees,  ex- 
pected the  advent  of  the  Messianic  deliverance 
after  seventy  Sabbatic  years  should  have  ex- 
pired, instead  of  removing  it  to  the  distance  of 
five  or  six  centuries,  f  The  limit  assigned  by  the 
prophet  certainly  testifies  to  his  wonderful  range 
of  vision,  and  exalts  him  far  above  his  contem- 
poraries in  the  captivity,  none  of  whom  would 
have  been  likely  to  remove  the  beginning  of  the 
Messianic  sera  to  any  considerable  distance  be- 


•  [On  the  contrary,  thet«  is  good  reiison  to  believe  that  this 
remarkable  prophecy  sURtained  the  faith  of  the  pious  Jews 
in  their  anticipations  of  the  near  approach  of  the  liedeem- 
ers  coming  (cf.  Mark  i.  15 ;  Luke  ii.  a6,  3S),  as  it  has  since 
been  a  powerful  argument  to  prove  his  actual  advent  at  the 
time  predicted  (ct.  Gal.  iv.  4:  1  Pet.  i.  11).] 

+  [The  learned  and  pious  author  does  not  seem  to  be  aware 
how  nugatory  such  a  misconception  on  the  part  of  the  holy 
seer  would  render  this  prophecy,  the  markeil  pecuharity  of 
which  is  that  it  designates  the  time  of  the  evtots  predicted,] 


21S 


THE  PROPHET  D.iXIEI,. 


youd  the  close  of  the  Babylonian  captivity ;  but 
it  still  falls  below  the  hiatoriail  measure  of  the 
distance  between  Jeremiah's  prophecy  and  the 
New-Test,  fulfilment  by  100-110  years. — or,  in 
other  words,  instead  of  extending  into  the  time 
of  Christ,  it  merely  reaches  to  the  age  of  John 
Hyrcanus  and  his  immediate  successors.  The 
principal  stations  in  the  course  of  pre-Christian 
development  were  doubtless  sufficiently  ap- 
parent to  the  prophet,  and  upon  the  whole, 
were  seen  as  separated  from  each  other  by  pre- 
cisely the  interval  which  actually  resulted  in  the 
progress  of  events.  In  his  younger  contem- 
porary Cyrus,  the  "anointed  prince,"  v.  25,  he 
recognized  the  introducer  and  founder  of  a 
period  of  rcbitire  salvation  for  the  people  of 
God  (a  period  which  should  bring  a  restoration 
of  Jerusalem,  although  for  the  time  an  imper- 
fect, troubled,  and  oppressed  restoration),  and 
therefore  saw  in  that  prince  a  first  typical  fore- 
runner of  the  Messiah.  He  saw  a  farther  pre- 
fatorj-  condition  to  the  coming  of  the  Messiah 
in  the  religious  persecutions  and  antitheocratic 
abominations,  with  which  the  descendant  of  a 
royal  Javanic  house  should  afflict  Israel  in  the 
distant  future,  slaying  the  anointed  high  priest 
(Onias  III.,  B.C.  173),  and  even  interrupting 
the  theocratic  worship  for  a  time  and  desecrat- 
ing its  sanctuary ;  and  he  fixed  the  interval  be- 
tween the  former  positive  and  this  later  nega- 
tive preparation  for  Messiah's  coming,  with  ap- 
proximate correctne&s,  at  sixty-two  weeks  (i.e., 
the  diiference  between  the  first  seven,  which 
had  already  expired  at  his  time,  and  the  mo- 
mentous last  week  of  the  seventy — a  number  of 
years  which  certainly  exceeds  the  actual  his- 
torical interval  between  ad's)  and  175  or  between 
Cyrus  and  Epiphanes  by  seventy  years.*  But 
the  additional  interval  of  more  than  one  and  a 
half  centuries  or  twenty-three  to  twenty-four 
weeks  of  years,  which,  according  to  the  Divine 
purpose,  was  to  intervene  between  the  typical 
ui'.: fr  Tfiv  xpiiyrijv  of  the  Maccabsau  age  and  the 
advent  of  Christ,  escaped  his  vision  while  rang- 
ing in  the  distance.  In  the  limitation  of  his 
earthly  and  human  consciousness  f  he  did  not 
suspect  that  the  Spirit  of  prophecy  did  not  re- 
veal to  him  any  immediate,  but  only  indirect 
preparations  and  types  of  the  Messianic  a;ra.  He 
does  not  see  the  abysmal  gap  of  renewed  wait- 
ing during  nearly  two  hundred  years,  which 
sep.orated  the  bright  exaltation  of  the  victorious 
JIaccabjean  sera  from  the  still  more  glorious  and 
iieaveuly  period  in  which  the  New  Covenant 
should  be  established  ;  and  the  prophets  and  ob- 
servei's  of  prophetic  predictions  immediately 
subsequent  to  him,  probably  noticed  no  more  of 
that  interval  than  did  he  Icf.  the  Eth. -fund, 
principles  on  chap.  vii.  No.  2).  The  pious  theo- 
cratic searchers  of  the  Scriptures  in  the  Mac- 
cabsan  period,  and  probably  in  the  Ifiter  stages 
of  that  period,  who  had  themselves  begun  to 
experience  a  painful  consciousness  of  the  de- 
scent into  the  gap  which  Daniel  had  overlooked, 
were  probably  the  first  to  arrive  at  an  under- 


•  Cf.  Bleek.  in  the  JahrbUcher  f.  deutitche  T/ieologie^ 
ISiil).  p.  S4;  Beichel,  in  Slwl.  u.  A'lUiten,  1848,  pp.  737, 
748  et  scq. 

T  [It  shoul.1  rather  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  is  not  a 
question  of  Daniel's  subjective  intuition  into  the  future; 
thi»  dates  in  question  were  those  explicitly  given  him  by  Ga- 
briel commiaaloned  direct  from  heaven  for  that  very  pur- 
pose.] 


standing  of  the  merely  typical  nature  of  th« 
contents  of  vs.  2(3  and  27,  thus  being  taught  to 
look  for  a  more  perfect  and  enduring  realizatior 
of  that  oracle.  Cf.  Kr,iuichfeld,  p.  8:37;  "This 
natural  difference  between  the  prophet's  concep- 
tion of  events  and  their  historical  reality  would 
ultimately  lead  to  the  inference  that  a  farther 
realization  of  the  jjrophecy  was  to  be  expected,* 
inasmuch  as  the  Creciau  empire,  and  more  par- 
ticularly that  of  Antiocbus  Epiphanes,  did  not 
appear  as  the  last  of  the  heathen  monarchies, 
and  the  final  supremacy  of  the  Messianic  king- 
dom of  God  was  not  yet  introduced.  Instead 
of  charging  the  prophetic  idea  as  such  with  be- 
ing untrue  in  this  respect,  or  of  rejecting  it 
without  farther  investigation  as  not  having  been 
fulfilled,  the  thoughtful  circles  among  the  peo- 
ple would  probably  treat  that  idea  as  Ilaggai, 
Zechariah,  Malachi.  and  Daniel  himself  treated 
the  Messianic  hopes  of  Jeremiah  or  Isaiah,  that 
were  connected  with  the  return  from  the  cap- 
tivity, since  the  prophetic  description  had  been 
so  remarkably  fulfilled  in  other  respects.  The 
internal  evidence  demonstrated  that  the  idea 
was  in  itself  incontrovertibly  true,  and  it  was 
regarded  as  such,  while  its  realization  in  the 
light  of  historical  facts  jvas  referred  to  a  more 
distant  future.  In  like  manner  Christ  unites 
the  description  of  the  Messianic  future  with  its 
conflict,  and  its  triumphs  with  his  own  time,  and 
connects  with  the  latter  the  thought  of  the  erec- 
tion of  Messiah's  kingdom ;  while  the  New- 
Test.  Apocal.vpse,  from  its  historical  point  of 
view,  connects  it  with  a  still  later  time.  Christ 
simply  regards  the  destnictiou  of  Jerusalem  and 
the  end  of  all  things,  joined  to  the  triumph  of 
God's  kingdom,  as  a  comprehensive  whole,  on 
the  authority  of  Daniel's  description  ;  and  he 
consequently  designates  the  present  ;.  erta  iMatt. 
xxiv.  31  and  parallels)  as  the  time  in  which  the 
picture  of  the  eschatological  future  should  be 
realized,  f  The  apostles  imitate  him  in  expect- 
ing the  end  of  the  world  in  the  age  in  which 
they  lived  ;|  but  the  Revelator's  field  of  vision 
lay  beyond  that  yevid,  and  beyond  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem.  That  such  a  transfer  and  re- 
ference from  one  period  to  another  (which,  aa 
compared  with  its  predeces.^'or,  is  to  bring  a 
more  complete,  and  ultimately,  a  full  realiza' 
tion)  is  possible,  without  degrading  the  prophe 
tic  idea  and  destroying  its  value,  is  implied  in 
the  very  character  of  the  genuine  prophetic 
oracle,  as  being  esstiitiaUy  coiitpre/ieiisive  in  itt 
nature,  even  though  the  tcriter  nuiy  primarilff 
have  intended  it  to  refer  only  to  some  particular 
event  in  the  progress  of  history. — The  reference 
of  the  prophecy  respecting  the  future  tribula- 
tion was  doubtless  accepted  in  the  beginning  of. 

*  [It  is  difficult  to  see  how  a  discoverj'  of  Daniel's  own 
error  on  the  point  in  question  should  lead  his  readers  either 
to  entenain  ^eater  faith  in  his  predictions  or  to  seek  for  ji 
more  correct  interpretation  of  them  than  he  was  able  to  attain 
himself.] 

t  [There  is  this  essential  difference,  however,  as  to  tho 
I>oii)t  at  issue  between  thi-se  eschatolofrieal  sayings  of  our 
Lord  and  this  of  Daniel,  that  Christ  expressly  disclaimed  any 
revelation  or  even  knowledge  of  the  "  times  and  seasons ''  of 
the  events  predicted ;  whereas  the  prophecy  before  us  i?  a 
pure  series  of  such  chronological  notanda.  Indeed  our 
Lord  in  these  very  utterances  §xi>licitly  refers  to  this  identi- 
cal passage  of  Daniel  as  affording  the  only  clue  that  he 
gives  to  the  date  of  their  occurrence.] 

t  [This  assertion  is  often  made  by  expositors,  but  it  if 
directly  conti-adicted  by  Paul's  emphatic  lang'jage  in  Si 
Thess.  ii.  1  seti.I 


CHAP.  IX.  1-27. 


210 


the  Maccabsan  epoch,  and  amongf  others,  liy  the 
writer  of  the  first  book  of  M-accabees ;  but  the 
Jewish  Sibyl  mny  serve  to  show  that  despite 
such  reference,  the  circumstances  of  the  times 
might  make  way  for  another  interpretiition  in 
each  instance,  since,  as  early  as  about  B.C.  140. 
and  at  the  time  of  a  newly  founied  hereditary 
Je\nsh-nation;J  dynasty',  it  makes  the  ten  horns 
of  Dan.  vii.  end  beyond  the  Epiphanes  with 
Demetrius  I.,  finds  the  little  horn  in  Alexander 
Balas.  who  seized  the  throne  of  the  Seleucida;, 
instead  of  referring  it  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
and  no  longer  regards  the  world-controlling 
power  of  the  Jewish  theocracy  as  bound  to  the 
ruin  of  the  dead  Hellenic  influence,  which  is 
characterized  in  mild  terms,  but  to  the  power  of 
the  hated  Roman  empire.  The  Romans,  whom 
the  Septuagint  substitutes  for  the  -^P2  in  Dan. 
xi.  31,  are  here  directly  and  practically  installed 
in  the  place  of  the  fourth  world-kingdom  of 
Daniel,  in  which  position  we  afterward  meet 
them  in  Josephus  and  the  New  Testament." 
Concerning  the  latter  point  cf.  Hilgenfeld,  Die 
■ludkchc  Apokulyptik,  pp.  69  et  seq.,  8-i  et  seq. , 
and  also  supra,  §  6,  note  3,  of  the  Introd.  to  this 
work. 

2.  Despite  the  repeated  specific  references  to 
tacts  .ind  circumstances  in  the  Maccaba^an  ajra, 
^he  prophecy  before  us  is  no  mticiiuinn  cx  eceiitu, 
that  was  invented  in  that  age ;  for  the  want  of 
agreement  between  its  statements  and  the  actu- 
al conditions  of  that  time  is  far  more  general 
than  their  corre-spondence.*  It  is  (1)  a  funda- 
nental  non-agreement  between  the  prophecy 
<nd  the  fulfilment,  that  the  sixty-two  weeks 
if  years,  if  reckoned  from  the  end  of  the  seven 
*'eeks.  or  from  B.C.  538,  in  harmony  with  the 
context  and  the  evident  sense  of  the  prophecy, 
extend  down  to  B.C.  105,  while  the  whole  of  the 
Antiochian-MaccabEean  catastrophe,  which  forms 
the  contents  of  the  last  week  of  years,  was 
ended  at  least  seventy  j'ears  earlier ;  and  (against 
Ewaldi  the  text  contains  no  indication  whatever 
that  the  period  of  434  years  or  sixty-two  weeks 
Is  to  be  shortened  by  seventy  years  or  ten  weeks 
)f  years.  Further  (2),  the  murder  of  the  high 
priest  Ouias,  which  we  are  compelled  to  regard 
IS  the  JIaccabsean  or  typical  fulfilment  of  the 
^,.„.^  r"^S",  V.  36,  did  not  transpire  exactly  in 
the  beginning  of  the  sixty-ninth  or  last  week, 
but  somewhat  earli'^r,  in  the  year  141  ae.  Sel., 
which  was  still  included  in  the  sixty-second  week 
<,cf.  2  Mace.  iv.  7  et  seq.;  xxiii.  34).  The  pre- 
dictio  r  of  V.  26,  "and  after  the  threescore  and 
two  weeks  shall  an  anointed  one  be  cut  off." 
does  not  therefore  harmonize  exactly  with  the 
corresponding  fact  in  the  Maccabaian  historj- 
(cf.  supra,  on  that  passage ;  also  Kranichfeld, 
p.  309  et  seq. )  ;  and  if  not  Onias,  but  Seleucus 
Philopater  is  to  be  understood  as  denoted  by  the 
"  anointed  one  who  was  cut  off,"  as  Bleek,  Mau- 
rer,  Roesch,  v.  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  etc.,  contend, 
the  chronological  discrepancy  becomes  still 
giea,tei.     To  this  must  be  added  (.3)  that  the 

•  [This  effort  of  the  author  to  turn  to  advantage  in  one 
tTlrection  an  acknowledged  failure  in  another,  i.s  inffeniuuR, 
but  unfortunately,  if  true,  would  prove  too  much  ;  for  ;f  the 
prf  phecy  does^  nut  tally  with  its  alleged  fnlfiiment  it  i... 
thereby  shown  not  only  to  have  been  not  written  after  the 
event,  but  to  have  been  nv  true  prophcLy  at  aii.] 


temple  and  the  altar  did  not  remain  in  the  pro- 
faned condition  to  which  Antiochus  EpiphanoB 
had  reduced  them  during  "half  a  week  or 
three  and  a  h.alf  years,  but  only  during  thre* 
J  ears  and  a  few  days  (see  Eth.-fund.  principles, 
etc.,  on  chap.  vii.  Xo.  3,  i),  and  fiuially  (4),  that 
the  detailed  description  of  this  desecrated  state 
and  of  the  "abomination  of  desolation,"  v.  27, 
which  stood  on  the  sanctuary  while  thus  pro- 
faned, does  not  correspond  more  exactly  to  the 
statements  in  1  Mace.  i. ,  than  the  allusions  to  the 
judicial  punishment  of  the  imtitheistic  madman, 
which  are  found  m  the  close  of  the  same  and 
the  preceding  verse,  accord  precisely  in  any  way 
with  what  history  records  concerning  the  end  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  In  order  to  be  understood 
by  his  contemporaries,  a  Maccabajan  pseudo- 
Daniel  would  have  clothed  his  allusions  in  a  very 
different  form,  and  would  have  made  them 
everywhere  less  equivocal.  The  surroundings 
of  the  vision  concerning  the  seventy  weeks,  and 
the  preparations  for  it  would  likewise  have  re- 
ceived a  diflterent  form  at  his  hands ;  and  the 
fei-vent  penitential  and  intercessory  prayer,  by 
which  the  Spirit  of  prophecy  was  invoked  and 
the  Divine   exposition  of  Jeremiah's  oracle  was 

I  secured,  this  especially  would  have  been  differ- 
ent in  both  contents  and  form,  from  what  it  is 
in  vs.  4-19,  had  it  been  invented  by  a  pseudo- 

)  Daniel.  Instead  of  revealing  a  relationship  to 
the  similar  prayers  in  the  books  of  Ezra  and 
Xehemiah,  which  were  written  immediately 
after  the  captivity,  it  would  have  displayed  a 
character  more  nearly  like  that  of  the  far  more 
verbose  and  prolix  apocryphal  writings  which 
originated  during  the  last  pre-Christian  centuries, 
such  as  Baruch,  Ecclus. ,  Judith,  and  the  addi- 
tions to  Esther  and  Daniel ;  cf . ,  in  addition  to 
Bar.  1.  14-ii.  19  (regarding  which  see  above,  on 
V.  4et  seq.),  especially  Ecclus.  li. ;  Jud.  ix.;  Tob. 
iii.  and  xiii. ;  Ezek.  iii.  1  et  seq.;  and  also  the 
Prayer  of  Azariah,  Dan.  iii.  20  et  seq.  Nor 
would  the  alleged  pseudo-Daniel  of  the  Mac- 
cabaian age  have  been  likely  to  omit  from  a 
prayer  written  to  favor  a  tendency,  every  allu- 
sion to  the  raging  of  the  enemies  of  God's  peo- 
ple, which  still  continued  at  his  time,  since  that 
prayer  would  unquestionably  be  designed  to 
contribute  to  the  quickening  of  the  religious 
and  national  zeal  and  courage  i  cf .  e.rj. ,  the  prayer 
of  Judith,  chap.  ix.  which  has  already  been  re- 
ferred to,  and  see  again  the  remarks  on  v.  4  et 
seq.). 

3.  The  praetienl  fundamental  thoiiglit,  and  t?i6 
central  idea  of  this  section  is  to  be  looked  for 
neither  In  Daniel's  penitential  prayer  and  fer- 
vent intercession  for  his  nation  only,  nor  yet 
merely  in  the  equally  serious  and  comforting 
disclosures  of  the  vision  of  the  weeks.  It  is 
rather  contained  in  the  relation  of  the  two  con- 
stituent elements  to  each  other,  i.e.,  in  the 
causal  connection  of  the  prayer,  as  the  expres- 
sion of  a  disposition  of  the  heart,  that  showed 
it  truly  prepared  to  receive  Divine  revela- 
tions concerning  the  salvation  connected  with 
the  future  of  God's  kingdom,  with  the  revela- 
tion itself  that  was  thus  obtained.  Inasmuch 
as  that  preparation  of  the  heart  reaches  its 
highest  point  in  the  disposition  which  constitutef 
the  prophet  a  ri~^!:n  "J'^N  (v.  23),  a  Godlov- 
ing  favorite  of  God,  a  needy,  contrite,  humble, 


220 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


and  therefore  worthy  object  of    the   yearning 
love  of  the  Father  of  mercies,  it  may  be  said 
that  this  expression  in  v.  23,  whicli  states  in  a 
brief  and  striking  manner  the  reason  why  the 
following  prophetic  disclosures  are  vouchsafed 
to  the  prophet,  contains  the  central  and  funda- 
mental thought  of   the  whole  chapter.     More- 
over, since  by  that  very  expression  the  prophet 
is  characterized  as  an  anxious  searcher  after  the 
goal  of   the  history  of  the  Old-Test,  empires, 
and  as  one   of  those  humble  and  self-abasing 
servants  of  God,  to  whom  He  granted  the  most 
extended  view  of  the  future  of  His  kingdom,* 
in  reward  of  their  humility  and  their  faithful  in- 
vestigations in  the  documents  containing  His  re- 
velation  of    salvation,   the  nature    of  genvine 
prophecy  under  the  Old  Dispensation,  as  being  a 
lon(fing  and  anxious  preparation  for  the  future 
■manifestation  of  deliverance  in  Chi-ist  may  be 
found  to  have  been  characterized  in  this  section, 
and  to  have  been  exemplified  in  one  of  the  most 
prominent  instances  in  the  collective  develop- 
ment of  Old  Testament.     The  theme  for  the 
horailetical  treatment  of  the  chapter  as  a  whole 
might  therefore  read  :   "  Daniel,  the  favorite  of 
God ;  the  leader  and  founder  of  that  series  of 
pious  '  watchers'  (-;jocn5fx''/i£i'"',  Luke  ii.  25,  38) 
which  reached  to  the  time   of  Christ ;   the  ex- 
ample and  teacher  of  the  only  Divinely  attested 
method  of  '  searching  the  Scriptures '  (John  v. 
39)  ;  the  model  possessor  of  the  Spirit  in  which 
the  Scriptures  are  to  be  read  and  pondered ;  the 
ideal  prophet  in  the  sense  indicated  by  Peter" 
(1  Pet.  i.  10,  11 ;    TzepX  tj^  auvT/piac;  £^E^yrr/oav  Kal 
t^T)pEVVTiGav  7Tpo(j)yTai  ol  Trepl   Tijg  eig  vfiaQ  x^P^'^^K 
TrpOiptjTevoavTec,  Epzm'uvTEC  ftf  TLva  7/  Trnlav  Kaipbv 
iir/Aov  TO  £v  ahrol^  nvzvua  xp^otov  ■KpofiaprvpOfievov 
Ta  Et^  ;^;pfffrov  -Ka-QiifiaTa  Kal  rH^  fisra  rnvra  rSd^nf). 
If  a  proper  use  were  made  of  the  key  afforded 
by  1  Pet. ,  1.  c. ,  to  arrive  at  a  correct  understand- 
ing of  the  chapter  and  a  correct  estimate  of  the 
Messianic  position  of  the  prophet,  thus  securing 
the  weapons  with  which  to  energetically  refute 
the  current  rationalistic  prejudice  that  Daniel 
no  longer  represented  a   normal  and  healthful 
stage  of  ijrophetic  development,  but  rather  one 
in  which  it  had  already  begun  to  degenerate  and 
to    be    "  apocalyptically   diseased,"    a    sermon 
framed   on  some   such   plan  would  be  able  to 
achieve  truly  powerful  results,  both  in  a  prac- 
tical and  an  apologetic  point  of  view.     In  view 
of  the  extraordinary  wealth  of  matter,  it  might 
be  well  to  divide  it  into  two  themes  for  sermons, 
in  order  to  treat  it  thoroughly  ;  for  instance,  let 
one  sermon   treat   of   the   sjririt   in  which   the 
Scriptures   should   be  read   and   the   mysteries 
contained  in  them  be  approached  (vs.  1-23),  and 
another  bear  upon  the  principal  feature  disclosed 
by  the  Scriptures  when  thus  perused,   viz.  •   the 
fundamental  law  of  all  the  histmy  of  salvation — 
"  through  sufferings  to  glory  "  (vs.  24-37). 

*  Cf.  Fuller,  Der  Propliet  Daniel,  p.  204,  "  We  hear 
Daniel  repeatedly  ch-tracterized  as  a  Jewel  of  great  value  in 
the  sight  of  fiod.  Hence,  for  the  reaetm  that  Daniel  is  pre- 
cion.s  with  God,  the  latter  meets  his  petitions  and  wishes 
kindlj-,  and  makes  disclosures  to  him  which  would  not 
otherwise  have  been  imparted.  If  his  nation  may  find  com- 
fort and  eneouratrement  in  these  disclosures  at  a  later  day,  it 
Is  to  know  to  wliom  it  is  indebted  for  them,  and  to  learn  that 
a  man  upon  whom  rests  the  favor  of  Uod  may  be  a  blessinR 
to  his  peop  e  during  snl  sccjiient  centtiries.  For  Daniel  is 
not  merely  the  instrument  Ihrouyli  wliirlt,  but  also  the  man 
/or  rrho^e  Hake  God  imparts  this  revelation,  which  possesses 
Isicaleulablc  value  for  Daniel's  nation  for  centuries  to  come.*' 


4.  Homiletical  suggestions  on  particular  pat 
sages.  On  v.  2  et  seq.,  Jerome  :  "In  cinere  el 
sacco  postulat  impleri.  quod  promiserat  Deus ; 
non  quo  esset  incredulus  futurorum,  sed  ne  secur- 
itas  negligentiam  et  ne<jligentia  pureret  offen- 
sam."  —  Melancthon  :  "  Ltiatnsi  Deus  promisit 
beneficia  corporaliu  rel  spiritualia,  iamen  precibus 
■vult  exerceri  fidan,  et  viilt  crescere  poenitentiam 
sicut  iitquit  Zachanas  :  C'onvertimini  ad  riie,  et, 
ego  convertar  ad  vos,  etc.  Et  orat  Daniel  d« 
restituenda  Ecclesia  ;  ita  nos  qnoqve  officiamuT 
vera  dolore  propter  Ecclesia  calamitates  et  oremus, 
ut  Deus  enm  augeat,  gubernet  et  servet."  Spener  : 
^-(Penitential  sermons  on  Daniel's  penitential 
prayer) :  ' '  All  the  Divine  prophecies  are  obscure 
before  their  fulfilment,  and  can  only  be  appre- 
hended through  special  industry  in  the  light  of 
Divine  truth  ;  therefore,  '  whoso  readeth,  let  him 
understand'  (Matt.  xxiv.  14)." — Starke:  "  Ii 
Daniel  read  prophetic  writings,  although  him- 
self a  prophet  of  the  Most  High,  how  silly  is  it 
to  imagine  that  we  can  know  everything  of  our- 
selves !  Thence  it  results  that  dreams  and  false 
imaginings  are  taken  for  God's  word  (Ezek.  xui. 
3  et  seq. )  ....  It  is  certainly  the  duty  of  a 
Christian  to  exercise  his  faith  continually  in 
prayer  ;  but  when  a  special  promise  by  God  ia 
before  him,  he  should  arouse  himself  to  that  ex- 
ercise more  fully  (Acts  iv.  24) ;  for  there  are 
many  promises  which  include  the  condition  of 
true  repentance  and  obedience  to  God,  either  ex- 
pressed or  implied,"  etc. — J.  Lange  :  ''  Promise, 
prayer,  and  fulfilment  always  belong  together 
(Psa.  xxvii.  8)." 

V.  4  et  seq. ,  Melancthon :  "  Daniel  fa  tetur  pcc- 
catn  populi  et  tribuit  Deo  landem  jnstitia,  quod 
juste  puniverit  popvlum.  Deinde  petit  remis- 
siuncm  peccatorum  et  reductioncm  popndi.  Est 
ergo  vera  contritio,  agnoscere  iram  Dei  adtersus 
nostra  peccata,  expavescere  jyropter  iram  Dei.  do- 
lere  quod  Deiim  offenderimus,  tribuere  in  taudetn, 
quod  juste  nos  puniat,  et  obedire  in  pamis. — iWc 
Iamen  satis  est  peccata  noscere,  intueri  ptrnas,  sed 
iiccednt  quoque con.iolatio.  Ergo  Daniel  non  solum 
doctrinam  cnntriticmis  proponit,  sed  addit  partem 
alteram.  Docet  suo  exemplo  petero  et  expectare 
veniam  propter  mismem-diam  et  pretmissiones." 
— Starke:  "A  conception  of  God's  punitive 
justice  is  necessary,  in  order  that  man  may 
more  fully  recognize  the  guilt  of  his  sin,  ,and 
may  not  lull  himself  into  a  mistaken  security 
with  the  comforting  thought  of  His  mercy.  .  .  . 
But  despite  this  there  is  no  other  nor  better 
comfort  in  the  agony  of  sin,  than  God's  good- 
ness and  mercy,  through  which  alone  we  can 
obtain  forgiveness  by  faith." — Huvemick  :  "At 
the  same  time,  the  prayer  of  the  prophet  was 
not  merely  one  that  proceeded  from  him  as  an 
individual,  but  one  offered  by  him  as  a  mediator 
of  the  whole  nation,  in  whose  name  he  now  cried 
to  the  Merciful  One.  We  may  therefore  ascribe 
a  liturgical  character  to  it  with  entire  justice, 
and  thus  explain  the  frequent  borro%ving  of 
former  expressions  in  which  it  abounds." 

Verses  11-14,  Calvin  :  "  Danid  hie  significai, 
non  dsbere  videri  absurdum,  quod  Deus  multo  sit 
asperior  in  electum  popvlum.  quant  in  gentei 
profanas ;  quia  scilicet  major  eral  impietas  illiua 
populi quam  gentium  omnium,  propter  ingratitu- 
dinem,  pro^iter  contumacinm,  propter  indomnbil- 
em  illam  pervicaciam.  Quvm  ergo  superarint 
ItraelitcB  gentes  omnet  et  malitia  ct  ingratitudin 


CHAP.  X.  1— rs.  1. 


2L'l 


el  omni  genere  scelerum,  Daniel  hie  prtsdicat, 
merito  turn  duriter  ipsos  affligi." — Geier  :  "  The 
greater  the  favor  shown  by  God  toward  a  nation 
or  country,  the  gfreater  will  aftenvard  be  the 
punishment  which  follows  on  its  ing-ratitude 
(Deut.  xxxii.  18,  22  et  seq. ).  " — Spener : 
'  ■  Divine  threatenings  are  recorded  in  order  that 
man  be  deterred  from  sinning,  and  also  that  an 
evidence  of  God's  righteousness  and  truthfulness 
may  be  drawn  from  their  realization. — Without 
repentance,  all  other  means  to  avert  the  wrath 
of  God  are  useless.  He  that  should  endeavor  to 
quench  the  fire  with  one  hand,  while  pouring  oil 
on  it  with  the  other,  would  increase  the  fire 
more  than  his  attempt  to  quench  it  would  dimin- 
ish it  (Jer.  ii.  2:1)." 

Verse  ..t  et  seq.,  Starke  :  "  Where  genuine  re- 
pentance exists  it  fills  the  heart,  so  that  it  can- 
not avoid  breaking  out  in  humble  confession, 
and  that  repeatedly  (Jer.  vi.  11). — When  man 
humbles  himself  under  a  sense  of  God's  wrath, 
recognizes  that  the  punishment  was  deserved, 
and  flies  to  Divine  mercy  for  refuge,  God 
transforms  His  wrath  and  displeasure  into 
grace  (Psa  Ixxsi.  14,  15). — If  the  church,  and 
even  everj'  single  member  belonging  to  it,  bears 
the  name  of  Christ,  it  fqjlows  that  this  is  the 
most  powerful  motive  to  hear  our  [irayer  for  the 
church  which  we  can  present  to  God  (cf.  Acts 
iv.  27  et  seq  )." — Hiivemick  :  "As  the  strongest 
motive  for  a  father  to  be  careful  for  his  child, 
is  that  it  is  called  by  his  name — and  that  not  in 
conformity  with  a  custom  having  no  significance, 
but  asa  sign  that  it  belongs  to  him  and  must  be 
considered  as  his  property, — so  the  prophet  here 
expresses  his  confidence  in  the  grace  of  God 
most  beautifully  by  the  feature  that  he  refers  to 
the  citi/  ithich  in  culled  hi/  the  name  of  Ood.  the 
city  of  Jehovah,  the  great  King,  which  is  founded 
in  eternity  (Psa.  xlvi.  ij ;  xlviii.  2,  9  ;  Ixxxvii.  Hj." 

Verses  20-28,  Jerome  :  "  Non  piypuli  tiintvm 
peccatn,  sea  et  sun  repUait,  quia  uiius  e  popiilo 
est;  sine  humiliter.  quum  peccatum  ipsen-iiife- 
cerit.  sejungil  populo  jieccatori,  ut  ex  humilitate 
veniiim  conseqnatur." — Id.  (on  chap.  x.  11)  : 
^'  Congruenter  '  vir  desideriorum'  vacatur,  qui 
iiistantia  precum  et  afflictione,  corporisque  jeju- 
niarumqus  duritie  cupit  scire  veiitura  tt  Dei  se- 
cret n  cognoscere. " — Starke  :  "The  prayer  that  is 
poured  out  before  God  for  our  personal  wants 
and  the  common  need  is  never  unheard  (Psa. 
xci.  15). — What  will  God  not  do  for  the  sake  of 
man  I  The  princes  of  heaven  are  obliged  to 
render  Him  ser\-ice  and  reveal  His  will  to  the 
faithful,  that  they  may  be  strengthened  in  faith 
and  hope  (Heb.  i.  14). — True  Christians  imitate 
the  angels,  who  seek  to  instruct  each  other  more 


and  more  in  the  ways  of  God,  till  they  all  arrive 
at  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  Son  of  God  (Eph.  iv.  13;  1  Pet.  i.  13)." 
— Fjlier  (see  the  note  connected  with  No.  3). 

Verses  34-27,  Melancthon :  "  Primum  re- 
futat  hie  locus  errorem  Judanrum  de  lege  reti- 
nenda  et  de  regno  politico  Christi.  Si  erit  perpe- 
tuajiistifia.  item:  si  ChriHus occidetur,  sequitur 
legem  Mosakam  noii  retiiieitdam  e~ise,  nee  fore 
mundanumregnum. — Secundo  tradit  testimonium 
depassione  Christi.  —  Tertio  cum  poUtiajam  de- 
sierit,  ita  ut  nullos  habeat  duces,  nullos  prophftas, 
nulla  trihuum  discrimitia  (cfr.  Hos.  iii.  4  8.),  con- 
stat impletum  esse  dictum  Jacob  :  Non  auferetur 
sceptrum  de  Juda,  donee  venerit  Sfdrator  (Gen. 
xlix.  10).  Necesse  est  igitur,  veni^se  Salvatorem." 
— Starke  :  "  If  everlasting  righteousness  shall 
be  brought  back,  it  follows  that  man  has  once 
possessed  it,  but  has  lost  it. — 'ttTiile  Christ  is  the 
true  High-priest  who  atones  for  all  men,  and 
the  great  Prophet  who  has  revealed  the  \vill  of 
God  concerning  our  salvation,  He  is  also  the 
true  King,  who  has  the  power  to  place  his  aton- 
ing blood  to  our  credit,  and  to  protect  His  be- 
lieving followers." — Havemick  :  "  The  com- 
plete expiation  of  the  great  and  numerotis  sins 
of  Isr.ael  shall  take  place  in  the  time  of  Messiah, 
the  true  High-priest ;  but  His  coming  shall  be 
delayed  untU  after  the  expiration  of  the  period 
that  was  indicated.  But  precisely  because  the 
sins  of  the  people  were  as  the  sand  of  the  sea, 
so  that  Daniel  himself  confessed  their  enormity 
(vs.  4-19),  it  was  necessary  to  provide  a  perfect 
and  wholly  complete  expiation,  in  contrast  with 
that  which  had  hitherto  been  made  in  the  tem- 
ple at  Jerusalem,  which  was  the  mere  foreshad 
owing  of  the  future  reality.  The  eyes  of  Daniel 
and  of  Israel  were  not  to  linger  on  the  temple 
only,  whose  restoration  the  prophet  so  anxiously 
desired  ;  they  were  to  Uft  their  eyes  up  farther, 
to  Him  who  was  to  come,  who  is  both  the  true 
temple,  and  the  priest  who  ministers  in  it " — 
Fuller:  "  MoauwhOe  the  principal  concern  was 
that  Israel  should  happily  escape  from  the  trib- 
ulation caused  by  the  Old-Test,  antichrist. 
When  that  was  realized,  it  might  be  inquired 
why  the  seven  weeks  of  years  did  not  begin  ('? 
— rather,  why  Messiah  did  not  come  !) — At  a 
later  period,  John,  the  New-Test.  Daniel,  ap- 
peared with  his  Revelation,  which  continued  to 
build  on  the  foundations  laid  by  Daniel,  and  de- 
scribed the  troubled  times  of  the  New-Test,  an- 
tichrist, together  with  the  deliverance  from 
them,  being  designed  to  render  the  same  service 
to  the  New-Test,  people  of  God,  which  Daniel's 
prophecy  formerly  rendered  to  God's  people  un- 
der the  Old  Covenant." 


t.  The  prophet's  last  vision,  containing  the  most  thormigh  description  of  the  future  sufferings  of 
Isi'ael,  and  of  its  ultim<ite  Messianic  exaltation. 

Chapters  X-XII. 

a.  The  appearance  of  the  anga  on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris,  as  preparatory  to  the  tubseqiient  uropheeies 

and  introductory  to  them. 

Chaps.  X.  1-XI.  1. 

1       lu  the  third  year  of  [to]  Cyrus  king  of  Persia,  a  thing  [word]  w.as  revealed 
unto  Daniel,  whose  name  was  called  Belteshazzar ;  and  the  thing  [word]  loou 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


true  [truth],  but  [and]  the  time  appointed  [warfare]  was  long  [great] :  and  ht 
understood  the  thing  [word],  and  liud  understanding  of  [in]  the  vision  [api)ear- 
ance.] 

2  In  those  days  I  Daniel   was '   mourning  three  full  weeks."     I  ate  no  pleasant 

3  bread,  neither  came  flesh  nor  wine  in  [to]  my  mouth,  neither  did  I  anoint  mj 
self  at  all  till  three  whole  weeks  were  fulfilled. 

4  And  in  the  four  and  twentieth  day  of  [to]  the  first  month,  as  [and]  I  was  by 

5  [upon]  the  side  of  the  great  river,  which  [it]  is  Iliddekel,  then  [and]  I  lifted 
uj)  mine  eyes,  and  looked  [saw],  and,  behold,  a  certain   [one]  man  clothed  in 

5  linen  [linens],  whose  [and  his]  loins  were  girded  with  fine  gold  of  Uphaz  ;  his 
body  also  [and  his  body]  vjas  like  the  beryl,  and  his  fiice  as  the  appearance  of 
lightning,  and  his  eyes  as  lamps  of  fire,  and  his  arms  and  his  feet  like  in  colour 
to  [the  aspect  of]  polished  brass,  and  the  voice  of  his  words  like  the  voice  of  a 

7  multitude.  And  1  Daniel  alone  saw  the  vision  [appearance] ;  for  [and]  the  men 
that  were  with  me  saw  not  the  vision  [appearance];  but  a  great  quaking  fell 
upon  them,  so  that  [and]  they  fled  to  hiile  [iu  hiding]  themselves. 

8  Therefore  [And]  I  was  left  alone,  and  saw  this  great  vision  [appearance],  and 
there  remained  no  strength  in  me;  for  my  comeliness  was  turned  in  [upon]  me 

9  i«to  corruption,  and  I  retained  no  strength.  Yet  [And]  heard  I  the  voice  of  his 
words:  and  when  [as]  I  heard  the  voice  of  his  words,  then  [and]  was  1  in  a  deep 

10  sleep  [stupified]  on  my  face,  and  my  face  toward  the  ground  [earthj.  And,  be- 
hold, a  hand  touched  me,  which  [and]  set  nie  upon  my  knees  and  wpore  the  palms 

11  of  my  hands.  And  he  said  unto  me,  0  Daniel,  a  man  greatly  beloved,  under- 
stand [have  understanding  in]  the  words  lliat  I  speak  unto  thee,  and  stand  up- 
right :  for  unto  thee  am  I  now  sent.  And  when  he  had  spoken  [at  his  speaking] 
this  word  unto  [with]  me,  I  stood  trembling. 

12  Then  [And]  said  he  unto  me.  Fear  not,  Daniel;  for  fi-oni  the  first  day  that 
thou  didst  set  [give]  thy  heart  to  understand,  and  to  chasten  thyself  before  thy 

13  God,  thy  words  were  heard,  and  I  am  [have]  come  for  [at]  thy  words.  But  [And] 
the  prince  of  the  kindom  of  Persia  withstood  [was  standing  in  front  of]  me  one 
and  twenty  days:  but  [and],  lo,  Michael,  one  of  the  cliief  [first]  princes,  came 

14  to  help  me;  and  1  remained  there  with  [beside]  the  kings  of  Persia.  Now 
[And]  I  am  [have]  come  to  make  thee  underst.'iiid  what  shall  befall  th}"  people 
in  the  latter  [sequel  of  the]  days:  for  yet  the  vision  is  for  mawj  days. 

15  And  when  he  had  spoken  [in  his  speaking]  such  like  [like  these]  words  unto 
[with]  me,  I  set  [gave]  my  face  toward  the  ground  [earth],  and  I  became  dumb. 

16  And,  behold,  one  like  the  similitude  of  the  sous  of  men  [man]  touched  [touch- 
ing upon]  my  lips :  then  [and]  I  opened  my  mouth  and  spake,  and  said  unto 
him  that  stood   before   ine,  O  my  lord,  by   the  vision    [appearance]  my  sorrows 

17  are  turned  upon  me,  and  I  have  retained  no  strength.  For  [And]  how  can  the 
servant  of  this  my  lord  talk  [speak]  with  this  my  lord?  for  [and]  as  for  rae 
[I],  straightway  there  remained  [would  stand]  no  strength  in  me,  neither  is 
there  breath  left  in  me. 

18  Then  [And]  there  came  again  and  touched  me  one  like  the  apjiearance  of  a 

19  man,  and  he  strerigthened  me,  and  said,  0  man  greatly  beloved,  fear  not; 
peace  he  unto  thee  ;  be  strong,  yea  [and],  be  strong.  And  when  he  had  spoken 
unto  [in  his  speaking  with]  me,  I  was  strengthened,  and  said,  Let  my  lord 
speak  ;  for  thou  hast  strengthened  me. 

20  Then  [And]  said  lie,  Knowest  thou  wherefore  I  [have]  come  unto  thee?  and 
now  will  I  return  to  fight  with  the  prince  of  Persia:  and  luhea  I  am  gone  forth, 

21  [then]  lo,  the  prince  of  Gra?cia  shall  [has]  come.  But  I  will  show  [tell]  thee 
that  which  is  noted  [recorded]  in  the  scripture  of  truth  :   and  tliere  is  none  that 

1  holdeth  with  me  in  [upon]  these  things,  but  Michael  your  prince.  Also  [And] 
I,  iu  the  first  year  of  [to]  Darius  the  Mede,  even  I,  stood  to  confirm  and  to 
etrengthen  him. 

ORAMM.4.T1CAL    NOTES. 

['    ■'""'"n  here  sittnifies  coyillnuerl.—- The  phrase  is  iweuliar,   Z'^fZ'  Z^VZ^,   literally,  sevens  datjs,  the  lattei 

oelng  ill  cpLXe;?oticiLl  appo-Jition.     It  is  here  used  in  coiitr»ft  with  chap.  ix.  'i^  et  aeq.,  to  tshow  that  literal  wooka,  and  nol 
bebdonindi'^  of  y^ars.  are  intended.] 


CHAP.  X.  ]— XI.  1. 


O'^S 


PREFATORY    REMARKS 

Coneerning  the  final  vision  of  Daniel  (chap,  x.- 
xii.)  as  a  tchole. 

The  last  section  of  the  prophetically  visional 
part  of  this  book  falls  into  three  clearly  defined 
subdivisions  of  unequal  leu^h.  and  was  there- 
fore not  inappropriately  treated  by  .the  person 
who  divided  the  Holy  Scriptui-es  into  chapters. 
It  is  not  only  the  most  comprehensive,  but.  be- 
cause of  its  form  and  contents,  also  the  most  re- 
markable and  difficult  among  the  prophetic  por- 
tions of  the  book.  Having  been  composed-later 
than  the  three  preceding  visions,  namely  subse- 
quent to  the  captivity  and  when  the  return  of 
the  exiles  had  already  begun  (see  on  v.  1),  it 
supplements  their  contents,  and  develops  them 
still  farther — especially  those  of  the  second  vi- 
sion (chap,  viii.)  and  of  the  third  (chap.  ix. ). 
The  development  of  the  fourth  and  last  world- 
power  to  the  stage  of  anti-Chri.?tianity.  which 
was  described  with  special  interest  in  those  two 
chapters,  is  now  illustrated  more  fully  than  in 
any  former  instance,  and  at  the  same  time,  the 
ultimate  triumph  of  the  kmgdom  of  God  over 
that  and  all  other  opposing  powers  is  brought 
into  a  clearer  light  and  portrayed  in  more  glow- 
ing colors  than  heretofore.  The  relation  of  the 
section  to  chap.  vii.  as  serving  to  complement 
and  still  farther  develop  its  subject,  becomes 
especially  prominent  in  this  bright  closing  scene; 
while  the  prophec}'  is  in  so  far  complementary 
to  chapters  viii.  and  ix.  as  it  describes  the  deve- 
lopment of  the  anti-Christian  world-power  in 
predictions  distinguished  by  a  greater  fulness  of 
detail — to  say  nothing  of  the  similarity  between 
its  preparatory  scenery  and  that  of  chap.  viii. 
and  also  of  ix.  20-3:j.  The  section  serves  to 
complete  the  visions  of  chap.  viii.  by  describing 
more  exactly  the  hostile  relations  in  which  the 
various  constituent  sections  of  the  fourth  world- 
power  stood  to  each  other,  as  already  symboli- 
cally indicated  in  chap.  viii.  23  et  seq.;  and  par- 
ticularly by  showing  how  the  holy  land,  which 
lay  between  the  contending  sections  of  the 
divided  empire,  in  some  ca.ses  was  drawn  indi- 
rectly into  suffering,  and  in  others  was  made  the 
object  of  direct  attack.  In  like  manner  this 
vision  becomes  complementary  to  that  in  chap. 
ix.  since  it  fills  the  outline  of  the  sixty-two 
weeks  and  also  of  the  one  final  week  of  tribula- 
tion [?|,  which  were  but  briefly  referred  to  in 
that  chapter,  with  a  wealth  of  contents,  that 
displays  a  growing  animation  and  interest  as  the 
description  draws  near  to  the  close  of  the  sixt.y- 
second  and  the  beginning  of  the  last  week.  In 
tracing  the  particular  manner  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  anti-Christian  power  out  of  the 
fourth  and  last  world-monarchy,  there  seems  to 
have  been  the  occauonal  intercention  of  a  later 
fiand,  which  dreoo  the  prophe-y  with  sharper  lines 
and  adapted  it  nwre  fully  to  th(  xuhstqiient  facts 
connected  icilh  its  historical  fulfilment,  than  had 
been  done  in  the  general  outline  irkich  icas  revealed 
to  the  prophet.*  The  statements  in  v.  5  et  seq., 
concei-uing  the  geographical  position  of  the  two 
most  powerful  sections  of  the  great  divided  Ja- 
vanic  world-empire,  and  also  concerning  the  di- 

*  [We  have  repeatedly  objectetl  to  tnis  hypothesia  of  a 
lat«r  mtcrpolation  us  purely  aiibjective  aud  gratuitous.] 


rection  taken  by  the  various  expeditions  for  con- 
quest which  their  rulers  organized,  the  repeated 
attempts  to  unite  the  contending  dynasties  by 
means  of  matrimonial  alliances,  the  insurrec- 
tions and  treasonable  plots  against  individual 
sovereigns,  etc..  can  hardly  be  regarded  other- 
wise than  as  interpolations  on  the  part  of  a  pious 
Jewish  apocalyptist  of  the  Maccaba;an  age,  al- 
though it  may  be  impossible  at  this  day  to  ven- 
ture a  definite  estimate  respecting  the  propor- 
tion of  the  whole  section  chap.  xi.  5— 45  that 
originated  with  Daniel,  or  as  to  how  much  is  to  be 
credited  to  the  subsequent  reviser  (see  the  exeget. 
remarks  on  the  several  passages,  particularly  on 
vs.  5,  6,  8,  14,  17,  18,25,  2T,  etc.,  and  pre-em- 
inently on  -v.  40  et  seq.;  and  cf.  supra,  Introd. 
§  1,  note  3,  and  §  4).  While,  for  reasons  that 
have  been  given  (cf.  Introd.  t;  4.  note  1),  we  de- 
cidedly reject  the  hypothesis  that  the  entire  sec- 
tion chap.  X.  l-.xii.  18.  excepting  only  the  first 
four  verses  of  chap.  xii. ,  is  spurious,  we  regard 
the  theory  that  chap.  xi.  has  been  interpolated 
as  above  suggested,  as  necessary,  chietiy  because 
details  characterized  by  such  unusual  precision 
as  is  found  in  that  chapter,  seem  to  conflict 
with  the  nature  of  genuine  and  healthful  pro- 
phecy, and  with  the  analogy  of  all  the  remain- 
ing prophecies  in  the  history  of  Old-Test,  revela- 
tion.' We  are  entirely  agreed  with  Kranichfeld 
(p.  340  et  seq.)  in  holding  that  the  nature  or  the 
■"self-evident  canon"  of  prophecy  requires 
"  that  the  prediction  should  not  usurp  the  place 
of  hi.storical  development  itself,  i.e..  that  it  should 
not  adduce  such  future  dates,  as  cannot  be  con- 
nected with  the  time  of  the  prophetic  originator, 
as  the  unfolding  of  a  religious  <ir  moral  idea  ani- 
mated by  the  operations  of  God — although  in 
other  respects  a  pai-ticularizing  description  may 
offer  any  amount  of  detailed  representations  in 
illustration,  limited  only  by  the  confines  estab- 
lished by  that  canon."  We  cannot,  however, 
agree  with  him  in  believing  that  the  entire  vi- 
sion before  us,  and  especially  that  part  con- 
tained iu  chap.  xi. ,  must  be  regarded  " '  by  that 
canon "  simply  us  a  dereioping  of  the  ideas  con- 
tained elsewhere  in  the  book.  The  many  surpris- 
ing details  of  that  chapter  do  not  appear  to  an 
unbiassed  mind  as  the  mere  development  of 
former  thoughts,  but  rather  as  concrete  state- 
ments respecting  the  political  aud  family  his- 
tory of  the  Seleucidse  and  the  Ptolemies,  such 
as  no  other  Old-Test,  prophet  would  have  .at- 
tempted to  furnish,  even  approximately,  and 
such  as  conflict  with  the  spirit  of  Old-Test,  pro- 
phecy in  general.  We  are  certainly  not  com- 
pelled by  anj-  merely  subjective  reason  to  assume 

*  [That  the  prophecies  in  question  are  unique  in  this  par- 
ticular may  reiuli.y  be  conceded  without  any  impeachment 
of  their  genuinenii-ss.  The  w-hole  book  is  remarkable  for  ita 
vividness  and  personality  of  delineation.  The  details  were 
so  striking  that  Cyrus  tiie  Great  and  -\lexftnder  the  Great 
are  traditionally  reported  to  have  recognized  their  own 
portraits  immediately.  But  the  same  is  measurably  true  of 
other  specificatiiins  in  O.-T.  prophecies,  although  not  on  so 
extended  a  scale.  Even  the  name  of  Cyrus  is  mentioned  by 
Isaiah  nearly  two  ceutnries  before  his  time ;  yet  few.  among 
evangelical  interpreters  at  least,  would  on  that  account  pro- 
nounce those  paasages  a  forgery.  The  author's  reasoning 
for  the  rejection  of  the  authenticity  of  these  predictions  of 
Daniel  is  entirely  uncritical.  Hengstenberg.  in  his  w-ork  on 
the  Genniaenett  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  (Kdinb.  translation, 
sec.  xii.),  adduces  other  example*  of  enual  definiteness  in 
I  0,-T.  prophecy,  and  meets  this  whole  objection  fully.  The 
vague  manner  iu  which  our  author  adduces  the  argument 
gives  very  little  opportunity  to  do  more  than  make  this  gen- 
eral demurral  to  his  \iews  on  this  point.] 


S24 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


an  interpolation  of  the  text  of  Daniel  in  this 
place,  after  having'  rejected  that  theory  in  every 
other  instance.  The  only  reason  which  prevents 
us  from  defending  the  genuineness  of  this  clos- 
ing section  is  based  on  the  analogy  of  all  the 
balance  of  O.-T.  prophecy,  which  in  no  case  af- 
fords a  similar  example  of  specific  and  detailed 
description  of  the  future  (cf .  Tholuck,  Die  Pro- 
p/ieten  iind  ihre  Weixsngi/ngen,  p.  105  et  seq.  ; 
Die  Crremen  einer  Priidiktion — an  investigation, 
however,  which  seems  to  require  a  more  strict 
apprehension). 

The  whole  section  divides  itself,  as  has  al- 
ready been  observed,  into  three  parts,  the  first 
of  which  describes  the  general  circumstances 
that  conditioned  the  new  vision,  and  also  the  in- 
troductory features  of  the  vision  itself  (consist- 
ing in  the  appearance  of  a  mighty  angel,  which 
at  first  excited  the  prophet's  alarm  and  terror, 
but  subsequently  exercised  a  comforting  and  ex- 
alting influence  over  him),  chap.  x.  1-xi.  1.  The 
special  description  of  the  future  having  been 
thns  introduced  is  taken  up  by  the  second  part 
and  carried  forward  from  the  unfolding  of  the 
Persian  world-empire,  then  upon  the  stage,  to 
the  highest  point  of  conceited  power  developed 
by  the  antitheistic  tyrant  who  ultimately  sprang 
from  the  Javanic  world-monarchy,  and  who  be- 
came the  antichrist  of  the  Old  Testament  (chap, 
xi.  2-45).  *  Finally,  the  third  part  describes  the 
triumph,  the  deliverance,  and  the  exaltation  of 
God's  people  in  the  Messianic  period,  and,  if  it 
does  not  certify  the  nearness  of  that  aera  of  ul- 
timate prosperity,  it  j'et  conveys  the  assurance 

*  [Keil  takes  a  different  view  of  this  whole  prophecy, 
with  :\  view  to  obviate  any  sudden  transition,  either  from 
the  Persian  monarchy  to  the  Antiochian  tyranny,  or  from 
that  to  the  final  consnmnlation  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
*'TUe  angel  of  the  Lord  will  reveal  to  Daniel,  not  what  shall 
happen  from  the  third  year  of  Cyrus  to  the  time  of  Antio- 
chus.  and  further  to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  but,  accord- 
ing to  the  express  declaration  of  chap,  .x,  34,  what  shall 
happen  to  his  people  C^?2"n  r''"in50,  i.e.,  in  the  Mes- 
sianic future,  because  the  prophecy  relates  to  this  time.  In 
the   -^"1"'  r'^"inK  takes  place  the    destruction   of   the 

world-power,  and  the  setting  up  of  the  Messianic  kingdom 
at  the  end  of  the  present  world-aeon.  All  that  the-  angel 
says  regarding  the  Persian  and  the  Javanic  world-kingdoms, 
and  the  wars  of  the  kings  of  the  north  and  the  south,  has 
its  aim  to  the  end-time,  and  serves  only  to  indicate  briefly 
the  chief  elements  of  the  development  of  the  world-king- 
doms till  the  time  when  the  war  that  brings  in  the  end  shall 
burst  forth,  and  to  show  how,  after  the  overthrow  of  the 
Javanic  world-kingdom,  neither  the  kings  of  the  north  nor 
those  of  the  south  shall  gain  the  possession  of  the  dominion 
of  the  world."  But  this  last  would  certainly  seem  to  be  a 
very  inadequate  reason  for  so  great  a  detail  of  political  de- 
lineation. Hence,  after  pursuing  the  exposition  of  the  mid- 
dle portion  of  this  prophec.v  especially,  Keil  concludes  thus; 
'"From  this  comparison  this  much  follows  that  the  pro- 
phecy does  not  furnish  a  prediction  of  the  historical  wars  of 
the  Seleucidte  and  the  Ptolemies,  but  an  ideal  description  of 
the  war  of  the  kings  of  the  north  and  the  south  in  its  gen- 
eral outlines,  whereby,  it  is  true,  diverse  special  elements  of 
the  prophetical  announcement  have  been  historically  fal- 
filled.  but  the  historical  reality  does  not  correspond  with  the 
contents  of  the  prophecy  in  anything  like  an  exhaustive 
manner."  Accordingly  he  everywhere  exaggerates  the  minor 
discrepancies  that  occur  between  the  prophecy  and  the  his- 
tory of  .\ntiochus  in  particular,  with  a  view  to  enhance  this 
Idealistic  theory.  The  indetiniteness  and  inconsistency  of 
thus  carrying  on  at  once  a  double  line  of  interpretation  ren- 
ders his  scheme  on  the  whole  very  unsatisfactory.  Yet  it  is 
in  pnrsuance  of  hie  general  theory  concerning  the  absence  of 
*  "icsiirn  on  the  prophet's  part  to  particularize  the  history  or 
the  Jews  as  such.  To  a  certain  point  this  theory  is  doubt- 
teas  true  :  but  he  carries  it  so  far  as  to  render  the  predictions 
rather  symbolical  than  real.  The  discrepancies  upon  which 
he  chie.ly  relies  for  the  support  of  his  view  we  will  examine 
ta  detail  as  they  occur.] 


that  its  approach  is  determineil  by  immutabla 
measurements  and  conditions  fixed  by  God 
(chap.  xii.  l-l-J). — The  exorbitant  length  of  the 
intermediate  part,  exceeding,  as  it  does,  the  ag- 
gregate of  the  others  nearly  two-fold,  might  be 
adduced  as  an  additional  and  highly  proVjable 
evidence  of  its  interpolation,  as  suggested  above  * 


EXEGETICAL    REMARKS. 

Verse  1.  TJie  time  and  significance  of  the  vi- 
sion. In  the  third  year  of  Cyrus  king  of 
Persia — therefore  B.C.  536  or  535  [probably, 
534],  later  than  any  other  date  in  the  book  (cf. 
on  chap.  i.  31).  It  is  significant  and  instructive, 
as  bearing  on  the  subject  and  design  of  the  vi- 
sion, which  dwells  with  special  interest  on  the 
aspect  of  affairs  subsequent  to  the  Persian  domi- 
iiion.  that  when  it  was  imparted  to  Daniel,  he 
had  already  lived  under  Medo-Persian  rule  dur- 
ing several  years.  Cf.  Kranichfeld,  p.  340 : 
"After  a  series  of  prophetic  announcements  by 
Daniel  had  received  a  genuine  prophetic  fulfil- 
ment during  the  time  of  the  exile  itself,  and, 
on  the  one  hand  the  newly  confirmed  return  of 
the  exiles  had  been  but  lately  realized,  while  on 
the  other,  the  DTSn  t]i::^  which  had  been  pre- 
dicted instead  of  the  Messianic  glory,  was  feel- 
ingly demonstrated,  e.g.,  by  the  disputes  with 
the  Samaritans,  by  the  interruption  of  the  build- 
ing of  the  temple  (cf.  Ezra  iii.  8  with  iv.  8),  and, 
aboie  all,  by  the  continued  aversion  of  the  su- 
preme Persian  powers  (cf.  Dan.  x.  13,  20),  it 
now  became  the  interest  of  the  seer  to  devote 
special  attention  to  the  last  heathen  empire  of 
the  earth,  the  only  one  remaining  to  be  demon- 
strated, and  to  present  theocratically  this  last 
characteristic  picture  of  hostility,  in  colors  that 
would  constantly  impress  its  nature,  and  in  such 
detail  as  the  confidence  springing  from  the  un- 
varying success  of  the  past  would  justify. 
Thoroughly  convinced  as  he  was,  on  the  ground 
of  his  own  observation  and  of  the  teaching  of 
earlier  prophecy  that  the  Javanic  west  would 
eventually  displace  the  east  in  the  dominion  of 
the  world,  and  that  at  the  same  time  the  ulti- 
mate form  of  heathen  government  would  appear 
in  connection  with  the  former,  he  would  natur- 
ally not  regard  the  transient  Persian  empire, 
which  had  indeed  been  adequately  characterized 
at  its  very  beginning,  as  the  3"i""n  ri'^'ins  (cf. 

X.  14;  ii.  28;  viii.  19)  upon  which  prophecy 
elsewhere  dwells  by  preference,  but  would  rather 
con.sider  the  final  form  of  heathen  power  over 
the  theocracy  in  that  light." — Hitzig  inquires 
' '  Why  Daniel  was  stUl  at  Babylon  in  the  third 
year  of  Cyrus  ?  Why  so  pious  a  theocrat,  and 
so  devoted  a  lover  of  Jerusalem  and  the  holy 
land,  had  not  returned  thither  ?  'NMiy  he  should 
seem  to  place  himself  among  the  despisers  of 


*  [On  the  contrary,  the  fact  that  in  chap.  xi.  this  detail  in 
so  minutely  drawn  out,  is  a  strong  proof  of  the  genuineness 
of  this  portion,  ftjr  it  is  precisely  here  that  the  same  arch- 
enemy, the  Antiochian  antichrist,  is  most  vividly  depicted, 
who  constitutes  the  prominent  and  culminating  figure  in  all 
the  preceding  visions.  The  whole  chapter  evidently  revolves 
around  this,  which  is  likewise  the  central  point  of  the  entire 
book.  It  is  moreover  in  exact  conformity  with  the  spirit  of 
O.-T.  prophecy  to  dwell  thus  at  length  upon  the  nrnre.it  type 
of  all  the  Uibieaux  in  the  future  of  God's  people,  and'  tc 
touch  more  lightly  and  dimly  upon  the  more  distant  features.] 


CHAP.  X.  1— XI.  1. 


y2* 


the  holy  mountain  and  among  the  apostates 
(Isa.  Ixv.  11  ;  Ixvi.  o),  by  disregarding  the  ex- 
horta.ions  of  Isa.  ii.  to  return  (Isa.  xlviii.  20; 
lii.  11  et  seq. )?" — to  all  of  which  the  simple 
aiLswer  is.  that  while  ranking  as  a  highlj-  esteem- 
ed and  intluential  officer  of  the  state,  even  under 
Per-sian  rule  icf.  chap.  vi.  39),  he  must  have 
been  persuaded  that  he  would  be  able  to  render 
his  nation  more  important  service  with  regard 
to  the  rebuilding  of  their  city  and  temple,  were 
he  to  remain  behind  to  represent  them  at  the 
court,  than  he  possibly  could  were  he  to  accom- 
pany them  on  their  return  to  Judsa.  As  a 
secondary  consideration  his  somewhat  advanced, 
age  may  have  intiuenced  his  decision  (despite 
Ezra  iii.  12 1,  cf.  Hfivernick  on  the  passage. — 
Unto  Daniel,  whose  name  was  called  Belte- 
shazzar.  Cf.  i.  7;  ii.  20;  iv.  5;  v.  1-2.  Both 
names  are  given  in  this  place,  for  the  reason, 
probably,  that  the  two -fold  relation  which  the 
prophet  occupied  I  being  connected  with  the  Old- 
Test,  people  of  God,  and  also  filling  an  official 
station  at  the  court  of  the  world-kingdom)  and 
which  is  thus  indicated,  constituted  the  feature 
by  which  he  was  enabled  '•  to  view  the  history 
of  the  conflict  of  Israel  with  the  world-power, 
and  to  record  for  the  benefit  of  his  people  what 
might  be  expected  from  the  latter"  (Fiiller). — 
And  the  thing  was  true  j  or,  "  and  the  word  is  i 
truth,"  I.e.,  the  word  of  God  which  was  revealed 
to  the  prophet,  and  which,  unlike  the  words  of 
so  many  false  prophets  of  that  time  (Jer.  xxix. 
8  et  seq  .  15),  is  not  a  lying  and  deceptive  word, 
but  truth,  that  is  worthy  of  credit  and  shall 
surely  come  to  pass  ;  cf.  2  Sam.  vii.  28  ;  1  Kings 
viii.  20  ;  also  below,  v.  21  ;  xi.  2;  xii.  7. — But 
the  time  appointed  was  long;  rather,  "".and 
great  tribulation,"  supply,  "'  formed  its  subject" 
;t;3  S^^  is  an  additional  predicate  of  "i21,T 
(cf.  Gen.  xi.  1;  Isa.  vii.  24;  Jer.  xxvi.  2). 
Maurer  renders  it  correctly  :  "  'j  '■^^nnieuluynvo- 
Ciitnr  ah  argameitto"  and  also  de  Wette  :  "  and 
refers  to  great  wretchedness."  H^S  here  de- 
notes "warfare,  oppression,  trouble,"  exactly  as 
in  Isa.  xl.  2;  not  "bravery,  might"  (Vulg., 
Syr. ).  nor  "  e.xertion,"  as  if  the  great  effort  put 
forth  by  the  prophet  while  receiving  the  revela- 
tion were  alluded  to  (Hiivern. ),  and  least  of  all, 
"  ministering,"  as  Ewald  strangely  conceived, 
referring  to  the  numerous  angels  whom  he  re- 
garded as  being  engaged  in  this  new  revelation 
with  industrious  energy  and  care  (!). — And  he 
understood  the  thing,  and  had  understanding 
of  the  vision  ;  rather.  "  observed  the  word,  and 
gave  attention  to  the  yision."  1"?  is  not  an 
imperative  (v.  Lengerke,  Ewald),  but  an  infini- 
tive with  a  perfect  signification.  *  The  construc- 
tion with  an  accusative  of  the  object  is  similar 
to  that  in  chap.  ix.  2  ;  cf.  xii.  8.  The  following 
~;"3,  although  milel,  is  not  an  imperative  (as  v. 
Lengerke  supposes,  but  a  noun,  which  has  the 
.  accent  here  on  the  first  syllable,  because  of  the 
ticcented  12  that  immediately  follows;  cf.  Ezek. 
xix.  14.  The  probable  design  of  the  statement  ' 
that  Daniel  gave  careful  heed  to  what  was  ; 
revealed  was  to  emphasize  the  highly  significant 
and  profoundly  important  subject  of  the  vision 
_ — _ 

•  [Keil,  however,  agrees  with  Geseniua  and  Furst  in  re- 
g.'xr'iing  ilas  an  anomalous  ttiird  per.s.  iikisc.  fritter.]  1 

10 


from  the  outset,  and  also  to  give  assurance  ol 
the  credibility  of  the  prophet's  narrative. 

Verses  2,  3.  The  frame  of  mind  of  Daniel  and 
his  outward  deportment  vhile  reccicing  the  re 
velation.  Verse  2.  In  those  days  I  Daniel 
was  mourning  three  full  w^eeks.  The  tidings 
respecting  the  discour.aging  state  of  aifairs 
among  the  Jews,  who  had  returned  to  the  holy 
land,  which  may  have  reached  Daniel  about  this 
time,  may  be  regarded  as  the  probable  cause  of 
his  sadness.  An  especial  cause  of  grief  to  him 
probably  lay  in  the  fact,  that  as  the  intervention 
of  the  Samaritans  had  interrupted  the  building 
of  the  temple  since  the  second  year  after  the 
return  of  the  exiles  (Ezra  iv.  4  et  seq.  ;  cf.  iii. 
8),  the  latter  were  prevented  from  observing  the 
Passover  in  a  la^vfiil  manner.  His  attention 
would  be  especially  directed  to  that  fact,  since 
according  to  v.  4,  the  period  of  three  weeks 
spent  by  him  in  mourning  and  fasting  was  in- 
cluded in  the  very  month  of  the  feast  of  the 
Passover,  so  as  to  precede  the  date  fixed  for  the 
beginning  of  that  fea.st  (which  continued  from 
the  14th  to  the  2]stNisan,  the  "tir.st  month" 
of  the  Jewish  year)  by  twelve  days,  and  to  ex- 
tend three  days  beyond  its  close — to  the  24th 
Nisan.— a-'p-;  S^'^'fi'.  The  addition  of  S^a";. 
which  is  designed  to  indicate  the  full  or  enume- 
rated measure  of  the  weeks  (cf.  our  "  three  full 
weeks  "),  is  hardly  intended  to  contrast  with  the 
weeks  of  years  which  are  implied  in  chap.  ix.  ; 
for  the  contrary  cf.  Gen.  xxix.  14  ;  xii  1 ;  Num. 
xi.  20  et  seq.;  Jer.  xxvi.  3,  11,  etc.* — I  ate  no 
pleasant  bread,  ril'in  Onj,  "  bread  of  pleas- 
ures, of  desires,"  is  doubtless  a  contrast  to  the 
"bread  of  affliction,"  Dent.  xvi.  3,  i.e.,  to  the 
unleavened  bread  which  was  eaten  during  the 
Passover.  Hence,  the  first  expression  of  his 
grief  mentioned  by  Daniel  is  that  he  abstained 
from  the  use  of  leavened  bread,  or  from  eating 
the  ■';p.  'i  or  rpS^.f  Luther's  rendering,  "I 
ate  no  dainty  food,"  is  therefore  mistaken  and 
inexact;  and  also  Bertholdt's,  "I  abstained 
even  from  the  use  of  bread." — Neither  came 
flesh  nor  wine  in  my  mouth.  A  genuine  fast, 
in  which  all  dainty,  attractive,  or  luxurious 
viands  were  avoided  ;  cf .  Gen.  xxvii.  2o  ;  2 
Sam.  xii.  20;  Isa.  xxii.  13,  etc. —  Neither  did 
1  anoint  myself;  another  characteristic  indica- 
tion of  a  sorrowful  disposition,  cf.  Ecc.  ix.  8  ; 
Psa.  xxiii.  5  ;  Isa.  Ixi.  3,  etc. — Hitzig's  view  is 
.substantially  correct :  "  The  design  of  his 
mourning  was  not  to  support  prayer  and  inter- 

*  [In  these  phra.ses  Q^^Q"!  is  doubtles.s.  as  Geseuius  ex- 
plains, to  be  regarded  as  an  accusative  of  limitation,  the 
precedint;  noun  being  in  the  absohite.  and  not  the  construct 
state.  Yet  even  thi.s  appo.sitional  relation  seems  to  limit  the 
D'^y'Q'.r,  whether  the  latter  be  regarded  as  a  noun  =  weeks 

or  even  simple  =  seven  to  the  usual  hebdomadal  sense.  It 
thus  .stands  really,  though  perhaps  not  intentionally,  in  con- 
trast with  the  undetined  CJl^.T  of  chap.  ix.  ^4-27,  and 

leaves  the  word  in  that  passage  to  be  interpreted  by  the  ex 
iguncies  of  the  context.] 
t  [*■  But  this  contrast  is  not  well  fonnded,  for  the   fl'iS^ 

(niileoveiied  calet)  of  the  Pa.ssover  was  not  (notwithstand- 
ing Deut.  xvi.  :i)  bread  of  sorrow,  but  pure,  holy  bread, 
which  D.aniel  did  not  eat,  in  opposition  to  the  law,  for  three 
weeks.  Un^  is  not  to  be  limited  to  bread  in  its  narrower 
sense,  but  denotca/ood  generally." — Keil.] 


.'26 


THE  PROPHET  DAXIEL. 


cession  as  in  chap.  ix.  (for  which  reason  it  does 
not  assume  its  appropriate  garb,  cf.  Psa.  xxxv. 
13,  14),  but  rather  to  prepare  to  receive  a  revela- 
tion. However,  the  writer  by  no  means  enter- 
tains the  opinion  that  asceticism  could  secure  or 
compel  a  revelation  ;  for  in  that  case  the  means 
employed  would  have  been  increased,  particularly 
as  the  vision  was  delayed.  Daniel  rather  con- 
fines himself  to  abstinence  from  worldly  enjoy- 
ment, in  order  to  maintain  the  serious  frame  of 
mind  in  which  the  desired  revelation  should  be 
received,  and  which  is  the  only  one  that  may 
hope  to  be  blessed  with  a  revelation." 

Verses  4-7.  Ueaignation  of  the,  special  time 
and  place.  Description  of  the  appeantnce  of  the 
nnfjel  who  conrei/s  the  revelation.  And  in  the 
four  and  twentieth  day  of  the  first  month. 
Since,  according  to  Esth.  iii.  7,  the  ' '  first  month ' ' 
was  Nisan  (cf.  also  1  Mace.  vii.  49  ;  ix.  3),  and 
since  bj'  vs.  13  and  13,  the  mourning  and  fasting 
.  of  Daniel  began  precisely  twenty-one  days  be- 
fore the  present  date — therefore  on  the  third 
Nisan, — the  special  reason  why  he  commenced 
such  exercises  on  that  particular  day  may  pro- 
bably be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  1st  and 
8d  Nisan  were  still  observed,  at  the  period 
of  the  captivity,  as  they  were  already  in  the 
time  of  Saul  and  David,  as  the  festival  of  the 
\ew-year  or  of  the  first  new  moon  in  the  year  ; 
and  it  was  of  course  luisuitable  for  him  to  fast 
while  that  joyous  festival  continued  (cf.  1  Sam. 
XX.  18.  et  seq.;  xxvii.  34.  with  ii.  19,  vi.  29). — 
I  w^as  by  the  side  of  the  great  river,  which  is 
Hiddekel.  It  cannot  be  easily  determined 
whether  he  was  there  in  vision  merely,  as  in  the 
similar  case,  chap  viii.  2  (see  on  that  passage i, 
or  likewise  in  body.  The  latter  opinion  (Ha- 
vem.,  V.  Leng.,  JLaurer,  Hitzig,  Kliefoth,  Fid- 
ler)  appears  to  be  preferable,  in  view  of  the 
subsequent  mention  of  Daniel's  companions  on 
the  bank  of  the  river. — Concerning  Sijlin,  i.e., 
probably,  the  "swift,  tearing"  (from  p^^)l  as 
the  Scriptural  designation  of  the  Tigris,  cf. 
Gesen. -Dietrich,  s.  v.,  and  also  the  expositors  of 
Gen.  ii.  14.  The  latter  passage,  moreover,  clearly 
asserts  the  distinction  between  the  Hiddekel 
and  the  Euphrates,  which  is  observed  through- 
out the  Old-Test,  generally,  and  thereby  demon- 
strates the  mistake  of  Syrus,  who  regards  the 
in  in  this  place  as  denoting  the  Euphrates. — 
Virse  5.  Then  I  lifted  up  mine  eyes  and  looke  d, 
etc.,  exactly  as  in  the  vision  on  the  banks  of  the 
Eulieus.  chaji.  viii.  3. — And  behold  a  man 
clothed  in  linen.  The  descriptiou  begins  with 
his  clothing,  hence  proceeds  from  without  in- 
ward (contrary'  to  the  method  of,  e.g. ,  Matt.  xvii. 
2 ;  xxviii.  3).  White  linen  (3"'"?,  from  "?» 
cf.  Ezek.  ix.  2)  was  the  garb  of  priests,  especi- 
ally of  the  high -priests  (cf.  Lev.  xvi.  4,  23  ;  vi. 
3  with  Isa.  xliii.  28),  and  therefore  symbolizes 
hoUnefis  ;  the  addition  of  golden  ornaments  de- 
notes •princely  rank.  The  person  here  described 
was  therefore  at  all  events  a  -~p  ~i'^  (cf.  Isa. 
xliii.  28)  or  holy  angelic  prince,  and  more  parti- 
cularly, was  identical  with  the  "  man's  voice  be- 
tween the  Ulai,"  chap.  viii.  16,  which  directed 
Gabriel  to  interpret  the  vision  for  Daniel  in  that 
place,  since  according  to  chap.  xii.  G,  he  hovered 
over  the  ricer.     It  was  shown  on  the  former  pas- 


sage, that  the  angel  who  uttered  that  command 
need  not  necessarily  have  been  superior  to  Ga- 
briel, but  that  he  may  have  belonged,  as  well  at 
the  latter,  to  the  class  of  archangels  or  C"","i"  i 
and  he  may  be  regarded  as  the  compeer  of 
Michael  as  well,  despite  v.  13,  where  he  refers 
to  the  aid  he  received  from  the  latter  against 
the  prince  of  Persia.  Hence,  he  was  a  tldrd 
angel-prince  besides  Gabriel  and  Michael,  whose 
name,  however,  is  not  given  ;  and  it  is  there- 
fore vain  to  search  for  the  specific  name  he  bore. 
Hofm>ann,  Auberlen  and  FiiUer  conceive  of  this 
angelic  prince  as  being  the  power  of  nature 
which  operates  for  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the 
entire  heathen  world,  or  as  the  good  principle  in 
the  world-poicer,  which  is  identical  with  the 
(>fi7f  ^-ui',  2  Thess.  ii.  (i  ;  but  they  fail  to  establish 
exegetically.  and  in  an  adequate  manner  this 
identity,  as  well  as  the  chai'acter  ascribed  to  the 
angel.  Concerning  the  modicum  of  truth  which 
may  nevertheless  underlie  this  opinion,  see  Eth.- 
fund.  principles,  etc..  No.  1. — The  identity  of 
this  angel  with  Michael,  which  Ki'anichfeld  as- 
sumes, is  opposed  by  the  manner  in  which 
Michael  is  represented  as  not  being  present,  in 
vs.  13  and  21.  It  is  more  probable  that  he  was 
identical  with  Gabriel  (Ewald  et  al. )  ;  but  the 
appearance  of  the  latter  on  his  entrance  in  chap, 
viii.  is  described  in  different  terms,  and,  more- 
over, the  name  of  Gabriel  is  not  expressly  men- 
tioned ;  cf.  infra,  on  v.  13. — Whose  loins  were 
girded  with  fine  gold  of  Uphaz ;  i.e.,  with  the 
finest  and  most  valuable  gold ;  cf.  Psa.  xlv.  8, 
"gold  of  Ophir."  The  identity  of  teiS  and 
"i^pis,  which  is  assumed  by,  e.g.,  the  Vtilg., 
Chald.,  and  Syr.  (but  not  by  Theodot.).  is  op- 
posed by  the  different  form  of  the  name,  and  by 
the  impossibility  of  transforming  -  into  x.*  The 
country  here  referred  to  (and  in  Jer.  xii.  8)  was 
probaWy  a  region  in  the  south  or  east,  and  per- 
haps adjoining  to  Ophir,  which  abounded  in 
gold,  and  like  the  latter,  constituted  a  principal 
source  from  whence  the  people  of  hither  Asia 
derived  their  precious  metals  in  ancient  times. 
The  theory  which  seems  best  recommended  is 
that  of  Hitzig,  who  combines  the  Saner,  name 
ripdcd  =  liypluisiK.  with  the  supposition  based 
on  that  etymology,  that  the  country  derived  its 
name  from  a  colony  which  came  to  Arabia  FeUx 
from  the  river  Hyphasis  in  India.  Cf.  Nagels- 
bach  on  Jer.,  1.  c,  concerning  this  question. — 
Verse  6.  His  body  also  was  like  the  beryl,  or 
"  crysolite,"  hence  having  the  golden  lustre  of 
topaz  or  amber,  which  shone  through  his  garb 
of  white  linen.  With  regard  to  ".l"'"^.""" — whose 
primary  signification  was  doubtless  "  the  sea  " 
(  =  Sanscr.  tarisha),  and  which  afterward  became 
the  name  of  the  celebrated  colony  of  Phoenician 
merchants  located  in  Spain  ne.ar  the  Mediter- 
ranean sea,  and  still  later  was  emploj'ed  to  de- 
signate the  precious  stone  brought  from  thence, 
which  the  Sejit  and  Josephus  terra  the  xi""^""'^"i 
with  probable  correctness — see  Hitzig  on  Ezek. 
i.  10;  Gesen. -Dietrich  in  the  Ilaiidirurti  rbiich  ; 
and  also  my  obsers'ation  on  Cant.  v.  14.  — And 
his  face  as  the  appearance  of  lightning ;  cf. 
Ezek.  i.  13  ;  Matt,  xxviii.  3.    On  the  comparisoc 

•  [The  predominant  opinion,  nevertheless,  among  scholan 
ideutitius  Ophir  with  Uphoz.l 


CHAP.  X.  1— XI.  1. 


227 


of  Ms  eyes  with  lamps  of  fire   cf.   Rev.  i.   14, 
which  passage  is  wholly  imitated  from  the  one 

before   us And   his   arms   and   feet  like   in 

colour  to  polished  brass;  rather,  "arms  and 
feet  like  the  gleam  of  glowing  brass."  n;n~^' 
which  primarily  denotes  the  "  place  of  the  feet," 
is  here  synonymous  with  S"^.*?'^,  "  feet,"  as  ap- 
pears from  the  mention  of  m^lT,  "arms,"  in 
the  same  connection ;  for  why,  if  the  arms 
glowed  like  brass,  should  the  plnce  only  of  the 
feet  present  the  same  appearance  and  not  rather 
the  feet  themselves  ?  (against  Kranichf  eld,  etc. ).  * 
—  iip,  the  attribute  of  "'.^Ti:,  together  with 
V^lS  (cf.  Num.  xi.  7),  is  taken  from  Ezek.  i.  7. 
It  denotes  brass  in  a  glowing  and  liquid  or  mol- 
ten state  (  ibp,  a  fuller  form  of  the  more  usual 
ip,  light,  swiftly  moving,  volubilis),  not  merely 
*'  shining  or  gleaming  "  brass  (Ewald.  etc.),  nor 
yet  "  brass  of  the  smelting  furnace,"  as  Hitzig 
assumes,  putting  entirely  too  artificial  a  sense  on 
the  idea.  Cf.,  however,  the  parallel  Rev.  i.  15, 
OL  -zofh^  avrnv  bfioiot  x^^'^ X'^^-^t^^^'^  *^C  ^^  KUfilvu 
-e~vpi>nivu. — And  the  voice  of  his  vrords  like 
the  voice  of  a  multitude,  or  "of  a  roariug." 
■(i'in  iip  primarily  signifies  the  "  voice  (sound) 
of  a  roaring,"  and  may  denote  the  roaring  of  the 
sea,  of  the  stormy  waves  of  the  ocean,  or  of  a 
great  multitude  of  people  (Theod. ,  Vulg.,  Syr., 
and  also  modems,  e.g.,  Kranichf  eld,  FiiUer, 
etc.).  The  parallels,  Ezek.  i.  34  (C^X:  iip? 
D"2~);  xliii  2  ;  Isa.  xvii.  12  ;  Rev.  i.  15,  deter- 
mine in  favor  of  the  former  interpretation.  The 
terrified  prophet  does  not  at  first  recognize  what 
the  speaker  says  in  so  dreadful  a  voice,  either 
here  or  in  v.  9.  Cf .  the  analogous  circumstance 
iu  chap.  viii.  13  <(. — Verse  7.  The  men  that 
■were  with  me  aaw^  not  the  vision  ;  a  feature 
similar  to  that  connected  with  the  conversion  of 
St.  Paul,  Acts  i-x.  7;  xxii.  11.  It  is  impossible 
to  determine  who  the  prophet's  companions 
were  :  they  may  as  well  have  been  the  servants 
of  the  highly  esteemed  •'  prince  "  Daniel  (chap, 
vi.  21),  as  associates  of  a  different  rank. — But  a 
great  qu  aking  fell  upon  them ;  evidently  because 
they  haird  the  dreadful  sound  of  the  roaring, 
although  they  saw  nothing ;  cf .  Gen  iii.  8  ;  Am. 
iii.  (I  ;  Acts  ix.  7.f — They  fled  to  hide  them- 
selves; rather,  ""they  fled  hiding  themselves. " 
Sinna.  properly,  "while  hiding  themselves," 
a  periphrase  of  the  gerund  ;  cf.  Gesenius,  T/ie- 
eaur.,  p.  175  a.  The  infinitive  with  i  would 
have  expressed  the  somewhat  different  idea, 
'•  they  fled  to  hide  themselves ;  "  cf .  1  Kings 
xxii.  25  ;  2  King.s  xix.  11. 

Verses  8-11.  IVte  impression  made  on  Daniel 
by  the  appearance  of  the  angel.  His  temporary 
s  upor,  and  subsequent  and  gradual  restoration. 
I  ,    .    .    .    saw  this  great  vision.     The  same 

•  [Kei],  however  contends  that  rri^n^'O,  jitace  of  feet^ 

does  not  stand  tor  feel,  but  denotes  that  part  of  the  human 
frame  where  the  feet  are  :  and  the  word  indicat€=i  that  not 
the  feet  alone,  but  the  under  parui  of  the  body  shone  like 
burnished  brass.] 

t  [Keil  thinks  that  "  the  voice  was  not  heard  till  after 
Daniel's  companions  had  fleil ;"  but  this  ia  by  no  means  cer- 
tain from  the  t«xt.l 


language  is  used  with  reference  to  the  appear- 
ance of  the  Lord  in  the  burning  bu.sh  to  Moses, 
Ex.  iii.  3. — My  comeliness  was  tiu-ned  in  me 
into  corruption;  rather,  "  the  color  of  my  face 
was  changed  into  disfigurement  for  me." 
Literally,  "and  my  brightness,"  etc.  (thu.=i 
Ewald  et  al).  ^^,■^,  "brightness,  freshness  of 
color,"  here  corresponds  to  the  Chald.  '"'^^ 
chap.  V.  6,  9 ;  vii.  28.  ^is*,  "on  me,"  seems  to 
be  a  Chaldaism  employed  as  a  periphrase  for  the 
dative,  and  therefore  to  be  equivalent  to  ^):>* 
(unlike  v.  10).  It  is  hardly  to  be  separated 
from  the  verb  and  to  be  immediately  con- 
nected with  ''li""',  thus  periphrasing  the  genitive 
(against  Hitzig). — rin"i'?35,  properly,  "to  de 
struction  ;  "  cf.  2  Chron.  xx.  23.  The  following 
context  indicates  the  nature  of  this  destruction 
or  disfigurement,  by  stating  that  the  loss  of 
color  was  joined  to  faintness  and  a  total  loss  of 

strength Verse  9.   Then  w^as  I  in  a  deep  sleep 

on  my  face,  i.e.,  in  a  stupefied  state,  during 
which  a  total  loss  of  his  senses  and  of  conscious- 
ness %vas  depicted  on  his  countenance.  — And  my 
face  (sank)  tow^ard  the  ground;  i.e.,  the  loss  of 
consciousness  was  not  momentary,  but  was  pro- 
tracted during  some  time,  and  brought  him  to 
the  groimd  on  his  face.  With  a  strange  arbi- 
trariness Hitzig  finds  "an  attention  to  trivial 
details  that  border  closely  on  the  comical  "  in 
the  statement  that  the  face  was  toward  the 
ground ;  as  if  the  frequent  expression  -"2S 
n-^-,St  (Gen.  xix.  1 ;  xHi.  6)  or  ."^S  in.^-.p^i 
(Gen.  xxxui.  8,  etc.)  did  not  likewise  indicate 
the  apparently  general  use  of  ~^"]S<  in  this 
sense  !     On  the  subject  cf.  chap.  viii.  17. — Verse 

10.  And  behold,  a  hand  touched  me.  The 
stunned  prophet  is  not  able  to  say  whose  hand 
it  was ;  but  the  tenor  of  the  entire  representa- 
tion shows,  beyond  the  reach  of  doubt,  that  it 
was  the  hand  of  the  same  person  who  had 
hitherto  been  in  his  presence  (cf.  viii.  18 ;  Ezek. 
ii.  9).  Kranichfeld  (see  above,  on  v.  5)  is  there- 
fore in  error  when,  after  having  assumed  that 
the  angel  described  above  was  Michael,  he  re- 
gards the  one  who  now  appears  and  henceforth 
addresses  Daniel  as  being  Gabriel  (as  do  Hiiver- 
nick,  Hengstenberg,  etc.).  Such  a  multiplication 
of  persons  is  unnecessary,  and  is  opposed  by  the 
total  silence  of  the  author  with  regard  to  the 
names  of  the  appearance  here  introduced. 
Maurer,  Hitzig,  v.  Hofmann,  Fuller,  Kliefoth, 
etc.,  correctly  hold  to  the  identity  of  the  angel 
who  touches  Daniel  with  the  one  introduced  in 
V.  5. — Set  me  (rather  "shook  me")  upon  my 
knees  and  upon  the  palms  of  my  hands ;  a 
constr.  prtpgnans,  for  "shook  me  and  helped 
me."  etc.  The  couching  position  which  he  ac- 
cordingly assumed  at  first  is  the  natural  posture 
of  one  who  is  stunned  and  overwhelmed  with 
awe  in  the  presence  of  a  superior  being. — Verse 

11.  O  Daniel,  a  man  greatly  beloved.  See  on 
chap.  ix.  23. — For  imto  thee  am  I  novi  sent; 
namely,  sent  at  this  precise  moment,  a.'^  the  ser- 
vant of  God  and  the  bearer  of  a  message  of 
blessing  and  comfort.  The  angel  designs  by 
this  encouraging  address  not  merely  to  induce 
Daniel  to  arise  to  an  erect  position,  but  al.=o  tc 


223 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


fix  his  attention  on  the  words  about  to  be  spoken. 

I  stood  trembling — in  fenrfiil  expectation  of 

the  things  to  which  he  should  listen  ;  of.  Ezra 
X.  0. 

Verses  12-14.  The  angeVs  statement  respect- 
iiig  the  design  of  his  coining  and  the  reason  of 
his  ddini  to  that  time.  Cf.  chap.  ix.  23. —For 
from  the  first  day  (therefore  from  the  third 
Nisan,  according  to  v.  4)  that  thou  didst  set 
thine  heart ;  properly  "  gavest  thy  heart ;"  cf. 
Eccles.  i.  13,  17. — To  understand,  and  to 
chasten  (or  "humble")  thyself  before  God. 
V.  14  a  states  what  Daniel  desired  to  under- 
stand, \-iz.  :  the  future  experiences  of  his  peo- 
ple. He  sought  to  obtain  the  knowledge  of  this 
by  humbling  himself  before  God  in  fasting,  etc. 
Consequently  njT  ni:?n~il  V"'^  may  be  con- 
sidered a  hendiadys.  to  the  extent  to  which  the 
implied  verbal  idea  is  co-ordinated. — And  I  am 
come  for  thy  ■words,  i.e.,  in  consequence  of  the 
words  of  thy  prayer  to  which  reference  has  just 
been  made.  On  ^■'■]:"13,  "nccording  to  thy 
words,"  cf.  for  instance,  Esth.  i.  12  ;  iii.  15  ; 
viii.  14  ;  1  Kings  xiii,  1,  etc.  The  perfect  '^^^*^' 
"  I  have  come,"  denotes  that  the  coming  of  the 
angel,  which  had  already  been  determined  on  at 
the  beginning  of  the  prophet's  prayer,  had  only 
then  become  an  accomplished  fact.  The  delay 
in  his  coming,  which  was  caused  by  the  inter- 
ference of  a  hostile  angelic  power,  is  accounted 
for  in  the  following  verse. — Verse  13.  But  the 
prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia  withstood 
me  one  and  twenty  days.  01B  fiisbtt  ^ip- 
Jerome  observes  correctly,  although  upon  a  pos- 
sibly inadequate  exegetical  foundation  ;  "  lule- 
tur  milii  Ilia  esse  angelus,  cni  Penis  ereditn  eM, 
fuxta  illiid  gnod  in  Deuteronomio  (xxxii.  8,  Ixx) 
leiiimus  :  '  Qunndo  dicidebat  AUissimns  geuteJi  et 
disseminnhat  filiog  Adam,  statiiit  terminos  geii- 
itium  jiuet^i  nume^ um  angelorum  Dei.'  1st i  sunt 
principes,  de  quibus  Paulics  apostolus  loquitur: 
'  Hiipientiam  loquimur  inter  per fectos,  quavi  nul- 
lus  principvm  sceculi  hnjua  cognovit ;  si  enim  cog- 
novissent,  minquam  Dominum  gloriw  crucifixis- 
aent.'  Reatitit  autemprinceps,i.e.,  angdua  Per- 
sarum,  faciens  pro  credita  sibi  proeincia,  ne 
captieorum  omnis  popnlus  dimitteretur."  This 
interpretation  is  supported,  and  that  of  Calvin, 
Hiivernick,  Kranichfeld,  et  al..  which  takes  1p 
in  the  sense  of  ' '  king,  earthly  and  human  sove- 
reign," is  opposed  by  the  following  considera- 
tions: (1)  in  chap.  xi.  5,  where  ''V  is  unques- 
tionably employed  in  the  latter  sense,  the  con- 
nection is  entirely  different  from  the  character 
of  the  present  passage,  where  the  D''"l"3n  which 
immediately  follows  obviously  denotes  angelic 
princes  ;  (3)  the  Persian  kings,  on  the  other  hand, 
are  termed  C"!B  "^Sb'p  at  the  end  of  the  verse; 
(3)  the  idea  of  an  angel's  conflict  with  a  human 
king  seems  very  inappropriate  ;  (4)  the  angel 
Michael  was  Israel's  "  prince,"  i.e.,  guardian  an- 
gel, according  to  v.  21  ;  chap.  xii.  1  ;  and  coiTe- 
eponding  to  this,  the  prince  of  Persia  who  is 
here  noticed,  and  the  prince  of  Graicia  men- 
tioned in  v.  20,  were,  without  doubt,  the  angels 
of  Persia  and  Javan  respectively  ;  (5)  the  idea 
of  guardian  angels  over  entire  realms,  whether 
f li.'tndly  or  hostile  in  their  disposition  toward  the 


theocracy,  is  attested  by  various  Old-Test,  par- 
allels, particularly  by  Isa.  xxiv.  31  (see  Knobel 
on  that  passage)  ;  Isa.  xlvi.  2 ;  Jer.  xlvi.  2.5 ; 
xlix.  3  (where  the  gods  of  heathen  nations  tak^' 
the  place  of  the  guardian  angels) ;  Deut.  xxxil 
8  ;  and  P.sa.  xcvi.  4,  Ixx. ;  also  Bar.  iv.  7  and 
Ecclus.  xvii.  17  (where  i/yin-fji  for  seems  to  desig- 
nate an  angel  prince,  exactly  like  ~'~  in  this 
passage), — to  say  nothing  of  New-  Test,  passages, 
such  as  1  Cor.  viii.  3  ;  x.  20  et  seq. — The  with- 
standing or  resisting  during  twenty-one  days  ia 
obviously  to  be  understood  seiisu  /losfjfo' ("I3;3' 
as  in  Prov.  xxi.  30;  cf.  2  Sam.  xviii.  13),  with- 
out, however,  involving  the  idea  that  the  Persian 
court,  or  any  earthly  locality  whatever,  was  the 
scene  of  such  opposition  or  warfare  (as,  e.g., 
FiiUer  assumes).  That  adrer.iari  may  more 
probably  have  taken  place  in  super-mundane 
regions  ;  and  that  this  was  the  case  seems  to 
have  been  attested  by  parallels  like  1  Kings 
xxii.  19  et  seq. ;  Job  1.  6  ;  ii.  1  et  seq.  ;  Luke  x. 
18;  xxii.  31.  Hofmann  {Schriftbew..  I.  '386  et 
seq.)  and  FiiUer  hold  that  "the  prince  of  the 
kingdom  of  Persia  "  does  not  denote  an  actual 
guardian  angel  of  that  realm,  but  any  evil  spirit 
whatever,  who  may  have  sought  to  exert  an  in- 
fluence on  the  decisions  of  the  Persian  king, 
while  on  the  contrary  the  angel  who  appeared  to 
Daniel  sought  to  counteract  that  influence  by  his 
own,  as  being  more  beneficial  to  Israel ;  *  but 
this  opinion  is  altogether  too  artificial,  because 
it  supposes  two  spiritual  powers — the  one  good 
and  the  other  evil — in  every  case  (a  "court- 
angel"  and  a  "royal  court-devil,"  iu  the  lan- 
guage of  Starke),  as  exerting  influence  over  the 
ruler  of  a  kingdom.  Moreover,  the  idea  of  the 
spirit  ruling  at  a  court,  as  being  either  good  or 
bad,  either  peaceful  or  warlike,  has  too  modem 
an  aspect,  and  is  foreign  to  the  modes  of  concep- 
tion that  were  current  among  the  ancient  Orien- 
tals. The  strongest  argument  against  this  opi- 
nion, however,  consists  in  the  consideration  that 
the  title  D^IS  DUba  13,  and  farther  on,  the 
appellations  Vl  ">?  and  C:ip  (Michael,  the 
prince  of  Israel ;  v.  21,  cf.  v.  20),  imply  a  more 
intimate  connection,  a  mach  closer  and  more 
constant  relation  between  the  angel  and  the  cor- 
responding nation  than  is  involved  in  a  merely 
temporary  influence  over  the  governmental  pol- 
icy of  any  particular  ruler.  A  spirit  who  may 
have  exercised  a  temporarj'  control  over  the 
decisions  of  one  or  more  Persian  kings  could  not 
on  that  account  simply  be  designated  the  ~'i! 
D^S.  The  angel  who  is  thus  entitled  must  be 
considered  the  constant  patron  of  the  Persian 


*  Cf.  eppecially  Fuller  on  this  pas.=;age,  p.  274 :  '*  The 
question  is,  which  of  the  two  spirits  shall  succeed  in  exer- 
cising the  greater  influence  over  tlie  Persian  court  and  king. 
It  becomes  an  object  to  g;iin  the  consent  of  the  Persian  king 
and  the  holders  of  power  under  him,  that  ho  may  decide 
thus  or  othenvisc  ....  It  is  conceivable  that  in  such  a 
case  the  gootl  spirit,  who  operated  on  the  world-ruler,  would 
occupy  a  more  difficult  position,  and  be  engaged  in  a 
harder  task  than  the  evil  spirit,  to  whom  the  heart  of  the 
natural  man.  to  say  nothing  of  the  heart  of  a  heathen,  is 
more  accessible  than  it  is  to  the  former.  It  was  then  that 
Michael  came  to  his  support  i<y  causinp:,  as  Hofmann  re- 
marks (as  above,  p.  2!^8).  the  relations  which  CjTus  had  as- 
sumed  toward  the  Jewi-h  people  to  operate  on  that  king, 
and  to  gain  increased  influence  orer  his  incUnatiolu  and 
views,"  etc. 


CHAP.  X.   1-XI.  1. 


22G 


nation  and  state,  as  much  so  as  Michael  was  the 
constant  patron  of  Israel,  having  been  known  as 
such  in  the  age  of  Joshua  (Josh.  v.  13)  as  well 
as  in  that  of  Daniel,  and  still  later,  in  that  of 
the  New-Test,  apocaljptist  (Rev.  vii.  7  ;  Jude 
V.  9).  For  additional  thoughts  on  the  subject 
see  on  vs.  20,  21,  and  the  Eth. -fund,  principles. 
And  lo,  Michael,  one  of  the  chief  princes  ; 
properly,  "  one  of  the  first"  (a't'jisi.n),  i.e.,  of 
the  most  emiaent ;  cf.  1  Chron.  xviii.  17,  and 
also  bin^n  "isn,  chap.  xu.  l.  The  name  Michael, 
'■^ quis  sicut  Deus"  (cf. ,  e.g.,  Ex.  xv.  11;  Psa. 
Izxxix.  7),  and  also  the  name  of  Isaiah's  prophetic- 
contemporary  "3"' ?a  (—  n^i:"'>3)  is,  according  to 
Haneberg's  correct  observation  (in  Reusch's 
Thiol.  LiUrnturlil.,  1867,  No.  3,  p.  72),  "a  name 
that  sounds  like  a  decided  monotheistic  protest 
against  every  undue  exaltation  of  the  angelic 
dignity."  It  expresses  still  more  strongly  than 
the  similar  name  of  Gabriel  (cf.  on  viii.  16),  the 
idea  of  God's  incomparable  and  assisting  power, 
as  whose  instrument  the  angelic  being  who  bears 
this  name  must  be  regarded  (Kranichfeld ).  His 
"  coming  to  help  "  is  probably  to  be  conceived 
of  as  an  armed  intervention,  and  supported  by 
celestial  hosts,  as  is  suggested  by  the  preceding 
warUke  phrase  ^'l^.^b  "'9^',  and  as  the  term 
^'!^?'7^  in  ^-  20  indicates  stUl  more  clearly. 
Michael  must  be  conceived  of  in  this  place  as 
battling  at  the  head  of  an  angelic  host,  as  in 
Josh.  V.  14  and  Rev.  xii.  7  ;  cf.  also  Gen.  xxxii. 
2  ;  2  Kings  vi.  17,  and  other  references  to  hosts 
of  celestial  angels.  How  little  this  belligerent 
attitude  of  Michael  comports  with  the  view  of 
Hofmann  and  Fiiller,  that  the  speaker  was  a 
special  "good  spirit  of  the  heathen  world- 
power,''  whose  battle  with  the  prince  of  Persia 
was  fought  in  the  circles  of  the  Persian  court, 
will  be  apparent  at  once.  Concerning  the  theory 
of  the  older  exegetes  and  also  of  Hiivernick, 
which  directly  identifies  Michael  with  Christ,  see 
Eth.  fund,  principles.  No.  1,  and  also  on  chap, 
xii.  1. — And  I  remained  there  itrith  the  kings 
of  Persia;  rather,  "and  I  became  superfluous 
there,"  etc.,  namely,  because  another  who  was 
still  more  powerful  than  I  had  relieved  me,  and 
now  represented  me  in  the  resistance  to  be 
made  to  the  prince  of  Persia.  The  angel  says 
that  his  presence  became  superfluous  "  with 
the  kings  of  Persia"  because  he  refers  to  all  the 
powers  who  operate  at  the  head  of  the  Per- 
sian empire,  including  both  the  earthly  and 
the  super-earthly,  the  guardian  spirit  and  the 
king  beside  his  chief  officers  (cf.  Isa.  xxiv.  21 
et  seq.  ;  Ivii.  9 ;  Psa.  Ixxxii.  6  ;  also  the  more 
extended  signification  of  "kings  "  [=  great  ones, 
mighty  ones],  which  occurs,  c.(/. ,  in  Ps.a.  ii.  2; 
Job  xxix.  %') ;  Ezek.  xxvi.  7 ;  1  Kings  xi.  24).   The 

difficult  0"i2  "wb'a  bss  D3  inn:ii3  -pss-i  must 

probably  be  explained  in  this  way  (with  Ewald 
and  partly  also  with  Hitzig).  The  explanation 
offered  by  others,  "and  thus  it  happened  that  I 
remained  or  turned  during  an  extended  period 
with  the  kings  of  Persia  "  (Vulg. :  ''  et  epo  reman- 
ti  ibi,^'  etc. ;  Syr.,  Dereser,  Ilosenm.,  Kraniohf., 
etc.),  U  opposed  by  the  fact  that  ^~""  does  not 
properly  signif}-  "to  remain  behind,"  but  "to 
lemidn  over,  to  be  superfluous"  (at  the  most,  it 


might  be  possible  to  adduce  Gen.  xxxii.  25  in 

support  of  the  former  meaning)  ;  and  also  that 
the  construction  of  the  sentence  does  not  justify 
its  being  regarded  as  a  supplement  or  comple 
mentary  explanation  of  the  remainder  of  the 
verse.  The  translation  of  Luther,  Geier,  Winer, 
Gesenius,  Hiivernick,  etc.  :  "and  I  gained  the 
(Licendimcy,  or  the  nct'try,  with  the  kings  of 
Persia,"  is  likewise  at  variance  with  the  general 
usage  of  ^^12.  Tb''.  explanation  of  Fuller  (and 
Hofmann  [also  Keilj),  "and  I  then  maintained 
my  place  beside  the  kings  of  Persia,"  certainly 
accords  better  with  the  usage  ;  but  it  is  opposed 
by  the  consideration  adduced  above,  concerning 
the  assumption  of  two  angelic  powers  who  con- 
tend for  the  greatest  influence  over  the  Persian 
king.  Nor  can  it  be  understood  on  that  theory 
why  the  plural  E  "'^-^  was  used  instead  of  the 
singular;  for,  although  the  opinion  that  the 
writer  intended  Cyrus  together  with  his  succes- 
sors, hence  the  entire  Persian  dynasty,  by  his 
'■  kings  of  Persia,"  has  recentl.v  become  .an  espe- 
cial favorite  (being  accepted  likewise  by  Fiiller 
and  Hofmann),  it  seems  to  us  so  improbable  in 
itself,  that  even  the  adoption  of  the  theory  which 
asserts  the  Maccabcean  origin  of  the  book,  could 
scarcely  serve  to  establish  it  (cf.  especially  Hit- 
zig, who  contends  for  the  more  extended  signifi- 
cation of  "^?3^  upon  substantial  grounds).  The 
Sept.  (and  Theodot. )  renders  the  passage  cor- 
rectly with  regard  to  its  meaniug :  nai  airbv 
(SC.  T(H'  M/|'aVT/)  Kart'/t-or  i'/,T/  //f7u  ror  (t,)\'oi— n^" 
liaai'/nnc  Ilf/jtJr. — Verse  14.  lam  come  to  make 
thee  understand  what  shall  befall  thy  people 
in  the  latter  days.  Cf.  the  introductory  words 
of  Jacob's  blessing,  Gen.  xlix.  1  ;  also  Num. 
xxiv.  14.  Concemiug  Cp'^n  rii"ins  as  a  desig- 
nation of  the  Messianic  future  (the  "'  issue  of 
the  ages,"  Fiiller),  cf.  on  chap.  ii.  28.  The 
"end  of  the  indignation,"  mentioned  in  chap, 
viii.  19,  is  not  materially  different  from  this  end 
of  (pre-Messianici  days. — -For  yet  the  vision  is 
for  many  days;  rather,  "for  yet  a  vision  for 
those  days, "  supply  "I  now  bring,  am  about  to 
reveal."  Q^'p'^n,  the  days,  those  days.  viz.  :  the 
latter  days  just  mentioned,  ^iy  is  probably  to 
be  taken  (with  Fuller  and  C.  B.  Michaelis)  as 
referring  indirectly  back  to  the  two  preceding 
visions  which  treated  of  the  latter  days,  hence 
to  chapters  viii.  and  ix.  (cf.  especially  chap.  viii. 
19  b  and  chap.  ix.  33  et  seq.).  Consequently 
the  angel  now  brings  pet  an  eschatological  pro- 
phecy, i/et  a  vision  of  the  last  times  which  forms 
the  final  and  most  specific  revelation.  None  of 
the  other  interpretations  yield  a  clear  sense  thai 
agrees  with  the  context,  e.g.,  that  by  Hitzig: 
"  but  it  is  yet  continually  a  prophec.y  for  ages  ;  " 
by  Hiivemick,  "  for  the  prophecy  to  be  imparted 
to  thee  shall  extend  to  this  time "  (similarly 
Kranichfeld:  "  -[-j-,  exceeding  the  present  and 
the  immediate  future  in  its  range  ") ;  the  highly 
artificial  one  by  Cocceius  :  "  erpectntio  j>ri»iiis- 
sionia  itdhitc  proteldbitur,  riempe  per  ista  teinpora, 
guce  partiin  c.  8,  partita  c.  9  descripta  s-unt," 
etc. 

Verses  15-17.  The  prophet's  renewed  conster- 
jtdti^/ii,  in  conseqtieiice  of  the  rerereritial  awe  fell 
by  him  in  the  pretence  of  his  super-h  ii/nan  visitor, 
who  therefore  now  assumes  an  increusinyly  human 


230 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


bearing  (see  v.  10  a  ;  cf.  v.   18  a) I 

set  my  face  toward  the  ground  and  became 
dumb  ;  the  same  attitude  of  reverential  awe  as 
in  Luke  xviii.  13 ;  xxiv.  5. — The  prophet's  dumb- 
ness was  twice  removed  by  the  comforting  inter- 
ference of  the  ang-el  (v.  l(i  et  seq.  and  v,  ID); 
but  he  afterward  remained  speechless,  excepting 
that  he  asked  the  brief  question  in  chap.  xii.  S, 
— And  behold  one  like  the  similitude  of  the 
sons  cf  men  touched  my  lips,  or.  "like  the 
sons  of  men  he  touclied  my  lips  ;  "  the  subject  is 
not  indicated  here  (and  in  v.  18),  which  does 
not,  however,  permit  a  doubt  to  arise  that  the 
one  "  after  the  similitude  ...  of  men  ''  is  iden- 
tical with  the  angel  who  was  hitherto  present. 
Sist  ■'^a  ma-S  serves  to  recall  the  a;»  -1=3, 

chap.  vii.  13,  as  Oi«  n»n;33  in  v.  18  recalls 
the  similar  expression  in  chap.  viii.  15.  An 
identity  with  Gubfiel,  however,  cannot  be  estab- 
lished on  this  repeated  assurance  of  the  angel's 
manlike  appearance  (against  Kranichf.). — The 
touching  of  the  lips  (for  the  purpose  of  unseal- 
ing and  opening  them)  is  similar  to  the  incident 
in  Isa.  vi.  7;  Jer.  i.  9. — O  my  lord,  by  the 
viiiion  my  sorrows  are  turned  upon  me. 
There  is  uothiug  strange  in  the  form  of  the  pro- 
phet's address  to  the  angel,  which  terras  him 
"  my  lord,"  particularly  since  the  angel  belonged 
to  the  class  of  "  chief  princes  ;  "  cf.  Josh.  v.  14  ; 
•ludg.  vi.  13.  With  regard  to  n"'"i:r,  "  sor- 
rows," properly,  "pains."  cf.  Isa.  xiii  8;  xid. 
3;  1  Sara.  iv.  19.  ""1^^,  "my  sorrows"  (cf. 
Psa.  xviii.  24),  characterizes  the  acuteness  of  the 
terrified  sensation  alluded  to  raore  impressively 
than  could  have  been  done  by  -"'"I''?  merely ; 
and  since  the  term  Ls  obviously  employed  in  a 
tropical  sense  only,  it  does  not  sound  strange 
from  the  lips  of  a  man  (against  Hitzig),  and 
does  not  require  to  be  obviated  by  means  of  put- 
ting an  unusual  sense  on  ^"^^2,  e.g.,  by  ''my 
^'o/;i?«  tremljled  in  me"  (Yulg.,  Luther.  Berth., 
Hiivemick,  F..ller).  or  by  '"my  features  were 
changed''  (Ewald,  following  Psa.  xlix.  15). — 
Verse  17.  And  how  can  the  servant  of  my 
lord  talk,  etc.  '^j'^n,  as  in  1  Chron.  xiii.  3,  a 
Chaldaisiu  for  '^1"?*. — As  for  me  (properly  "and 
I " )  straightway  there  remained  no  strength 
in  me,  neither  is  there  breath  left  in  me;  i.e., 
the  pon-er  to  stand  and  breathe  regularly  (1 
Kings  X.  5;  Josh.  ii.  11)  departed  from  rae 
afresh.  The  renewed  consternation  described 
in  these  words  was  not  as  great  as  the  former, 
'ji  V.  9;  the  "ceasing  of  the  breath"  was  not 
m  a  literal  sense  as  in  1  Kings  xvii.  17,  but  only 
figurative,  as  in  the  similar  form  of  speech. 
Cant,  V.  6, — A  majority  of  recent  expositors  cor- 
rectly regard  this  second  member  of  the  verse 
as  no  longer  belonging  to  Daniel's  address  to 
the  angel  ;  for  if  it  were  still  included,  the 
words  "there  is  no  strength  in  me"  would  have 
been  employed  twice  in  close  proximity  (v.  10  b 
and  here)  and  in  nearly  the  same  form.  More- 
over, the  incident  of  the  two  following  verses 
requires  a  suitable  preparation. — Fiiller,  how- 
ever, is  entirely  too  artiticiid  when  he  includes 
the  words  "and  I  —  ''in  Daniel's  explanation 
to  the  augi/1.  but  excludes  everything  else,  to 
the  close  of  his  remarks. 


Verses  18,  19.  T?ce  prnjyhet  is  touched  ana 
strengthened  for  the  third  time,  and  more  effec- 
tually than  before  (cf.  vs.  5  and  16).  The  being 
touched  and  strengthened  three  time-s  by  the 
angel  (in  which  old-churchly  exegetes,  e.g., 
Ephraem,  etc.,  sought  to  find  an  allusion  to  the 
Trinitj')  was  certainly  not  accidental ;  cf.  the 
conflict  of  Christ  in  Gethsemane,  Matt.  xxvi. 
38  et  seq.  ;  his  being  tempted  thrice  in  the  des- 
ert. Matt.  iv.  1  et  seq. ;  also  such  passages  as 
John  xxi.  15  et  seq.  ;  Acts  x.  16  ;  3  Cor.  xii.  8 
et  seq.,  etc.  Hitzig,  howevei,  being  utterly 
unaware  of  the  profound  mystical  meaning  of 
•  the  description,  thinks  that  "  the  broad  repre- 
sentation that  he  was  gradually  invigorated,  at 
first  to  speak  himself,  and  afterward  to  listen  to 
speech  (v.  16  b,  19  b),  has  a  manufactured  ap- 
pearance, and  does  not  impress." — Like  the 
appearance  of  a  man  ;  cf.  on  v.  10. — Verse  19. 
Peace  be  unto  thee  j  be  strong,  yea,  be  strong. 

"![)!  P-'H  ;  of.  T?»<;!  riq,  Josh.  i.  6,  7,  9  ;  and 
with  regard  to  the  repetition  of  the  verb,  as 
strengthening  the  idea,  cf.  Jer.  x.  25  ;  li.  34, 
etc. — For  thou  hast  strengthened  me,  viz.  • 
sufficiently  to  enable  me  to  listen  with  courage- 
ous composure  to  all  that  is  to  be  revealed,  not 
excepting  even  what  is  calamitous  and  terrible. 
Verse  20 — chap.  xi.  1.  Solemn  and  circumstiin- 
tial  introduction  of  the  svbseyuent  detailed 
descH'ptU.iii  of  the  future,  connected  with  an 
encouraging  reference  to  the  constant  readi- 
ness of  God  to  assist  Israel,  despite  the  serious 
character  of  the  situation  of  the  time  (and  par- 
ticularly, despite  the  dangers  which  threatened 
from  the  direction  of  Persia  and  Javan). — Enow- 
est  thou  wherefore  I  ccme  unto  thee  ?  i.e.,  art 
thou  aware  of  the  serious  and  highly  important 
character  of  the  message  which  1  am  to  deliver 
unto  thee  ?  Dost  thou  sufficiently  estimate  the 
tremendous  earnestness  of  the  situation,  in  con- 
sequence of  which  my  mission  became  neces 
sary  ''. — And  novi  will  I  return  to  fight  with 
the  prince  of  Persia.  That  is,  the  peaceful 
service  of  disclosing  the  future  unto  thee,  in 
which  I  am  now  engaged,  forms  but  a  brief  in- 
terruption to  the  great  war  which  I  must  con- 
tinue steadily  to  wage  against  the  guardian 
spirit  of  the  Persian  power.  With  regard  to 
^r??")  considered  as  denoting  an  actual  warfare 
rather  than  a  mere  altercation  or  dispute  in  the 
council  of  the  angels  of  God  (as  Bertholdt  and 
others  think),  see  on  v.  13. — And  when  (as 
soon  as)  I  am  gone  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of 
Graecia  shall  come.  The  "  going  forth "  in 
this  passage,  as  often  in  descriptions  of  warlike 
incidents  (e.g..  Josh.  xiv.  11  ;  1  Kings  ii.  7;  1 
Sam.  viii.  20;  Isa.  xiii.  12;  Zech.  xiv.  10),  cer- 
tainly denotes  a  going  forth  to  battle  rather  than 
the  mere  departing  from  a  locality  (Hofmann, 
Fiiller,  etc.).  The  observation  does  not,  how- 
ever, refer  to  his  going  forth  to  meet  the  prince 
of  Persia,  but  a  going  forth  to  other  conflicts 
after  the  war  with  the  latter  shall  have  been 
brought  to  a  close ;  or,  in  other  words,  it  de- 
notes a  going  forth  out  of  the  war  against  the 
prince  of  Persia  (so  Jacchiad. ,  Bertholdt,  Hit- 
zig, Kranichfeld,  etc. — correctly).  The  sense  is 
therefore  :  "  Scarcely  shall  the  Persian  war  be 
ended,  when  the  Greek  arises  against  me  ;  the 
conflict  with  the  Grajcian  world-power  .shall  be 
immediately  consequent  on  the  war  with  that  of 


CHAP.  X.   1— XI.  1. 


231 


Persia."  *  Cf.  the  similar  contrasting  of  S**^ 
and  5{nr  in  2  Kings  xi.  5,  7.  Hofmann's  exposi- 
tion of  the  passage  is  altogether  too  labored  : 
"  The  prince  of  the  Graicians  enters  into  the 
quarrel  against  the  prince  of  the  Persians,  from 
which  the  angel  retires ;  but,  after  the  Persian 
empire  has  fallen,  the  angel  renews  the  conflict 
with  the  new  adversary,  and,  as  in  the  former 
instance,  is  supported  by  Michael,  the  prince  of 
Israel"  (Schriftbew.,  I.  290;  cf.  Weissng.  und 
ErfuUting,  I.  312  etseq.).  Hofmann,  however, 
properly  rejects  V.  Lengerke's  view,  on  which 
the  coming  of  the  prince  of  GriEcia  must  be 
regarded  as  victorious,  and  leading  to  the  defeat 
of  the  angel.  Hitzig,  on  the  other  hand,  comes 
especially  near  to  the  latter  theory,  in  his  ven- 
turesome assertion  that  the  angelic  prince  who 
converses  with  Daniel,  and  who  is  to  battle 
against  Persia  and  afterward  against  Greece, 
represents  the  gnardinn  spirit  of  Egypt,  as  of  a 
power  that  had  been  friendly  to  the  Jews  in 
former  ages  and  that  especially  made  common 
cause  with  them  against  Syria  ( =  Javan)  in  the 
period  of  the  Seleucidas! — a  bold  hypothesis, 
that  has  no  support  in  the  context,  and  that  is 
absolutely  incompatible  with  the  expressions  of 
Eacred  awe  and  reverence  which  Daniel  made 
use  of  toward  this  celestial  'i'^,  according  to  v. 
5  et  seq.  Daniel  would  have  been  an  idolater 
of  the  coarsest  kind  had  he  rendered  such  hom- 
age as  is  described  in  this  chapter,  and  particu- 
larly in  vs.  Hi- 1 9,  to  the  angelic  patron  and 
representative  of  Egypt  (whom  he  assuredly 
regarded  as  a  dfnmonic  power  inimical  to  God, 
no  less  than  those  of  Persia  and  Javan).  And  a 
possible  Maccabasan  pseudo-Daniel  would  have 
been  still  less  likely  than  the  Daniel  of  the  ajra 
of  the  captivity,  to  involve  himself  in  the  guilt 
of  so  gross  a  violation  of  the  monotheistic  prin- 
cijjle  and  of  disobedience  to  the  first  command- 
meut  in  the  decalogue. — Verse  21.  But  I  will 
sh^w  thee  that  which  is  noted  in  the  Scrip- 
ture (or  book)  of  truth.  Z^S,  "but  still,"  a 
strong  adversative  particle,  serves  here  to  intro- 
duce the  antidote  to  the  fears  for  the  theocracy 
excited  by  v.  20 — in  the  shape  of  a  comforting 
allusion  to  the  ultimate  welfare  and  blessing 
which  are  awaiting  God's  people  according  to 
the  book  of  Divine  providence,  despite  all  the 
conflicts  and  sufferings  that  must  precede  them. 
Properly,  " in  a  book  of  truth, "  i.e.,  in  a  Divine 
document  upon  which  "  the  yet  umrevealed 
(Dent,  xxxii.  o4)  fortunes  of  nations  (Rev.  v.  1) 
as  well  as  of  individuals  (Psa.  cxxxix.  16)  in  the 
future  are  entered"  (Hitzig).  Cf.  the  books  of 
judgment  in  chap.  vM.  10,  and  also  the  terra 
r?2S  in  chap.  xi.  3,  which  briefly  comprehends 
the  contents  of  the  book  of  truth. — And  there 
is  none  that  holds  ixrith  me  in  these  things ; 
rather,  "  and  yet  there  is  none  that  exerts  him- 
self with  me  against  these,"  i.e.,  again.st  the 
guardian  angels  of  Persia  and  Javan,  the  die- 
monic  patrons  of  the  heathen  world-powers.  On 
""  p.^nri?a,  exerting  oneself  with  another,  bat- 

*  [Yet  "we  mu?t  not,  with  Kranichfeld,  supply  the 
clause,  *to  finiither  more  extensive  contlct,'  because  this 
supplement  Is  arbirr.iry  ;  but  rather,  with  Kliefoth,  interpret 
the  word  generally,  as  it  stands,  of  the  going  out  of  the  an- 
gel tii  fight  for  the  people  of  God,  without  e.\ctuding  the 
war  with  the  \  rince  of  Persia,  or  limicmg  it  to  this  wur " 
'Ke:l).] 


tling  beside  one.  supporting  one,  cf  1  Sam.  iv. 
9;  2  Sam.  x.  12.  The  participle  characterizes 
the  action,  although  future,  as  nevertheless 
being  constant. — But  (only)  Michael  your 
prince, — namely,  in  the  sense  of  Josh.  v.  13  et 
seq.  ;  cf.  supra,  on  v.  13.  The  sentence  "and 
there  is  none  ....  your  prince,"  taken  as  a 
whole,  is  not  intended  to  justify  the  greatness 
of  the  sufferings  through  which  Israel  must  pass 
(Hofmann),  or  the  long  duration  of  the  prospec- 
tive conflict  with  the  world-powers  (Fuller) ;  it 
simply  aims  to  place  in  a  clearer  light  the  help 
afforded  by  the  grace  of  God,  which  requires  no 
foreign  support  in  order  to  protect,  and  eventu- 
ally to  fully  deliver  Israel"  (Kranichl).  The 
sentence  would  still  express  the  idea  of  the  self- 
sufficiency  of  the  good  spiritual  powers  in  the 
kingdom  of  God.  which  require  no  aid  from  the 
world,  and  also  of  their  ability  to  effect  all 
things,  even  if  it  were  made  (as  Fiiller  proposes) 
dependent  on  ^b  ""??,  and  consequently  if  (in 
disregard  of  the  accentuation)  it%vere  translated, 
"But  I  will  show    thee  that  which  is  noted." 

etc..  '■ and  the  absence  of  one  to  help 

me,"  etc.  In  that  case,  however,  it  would  pre- 
sent two  very  dissimilar  objects  of  the  angel's 
remarks  as  co-ordinate  with  each  other,  the  for- 
mer of  which  is  very  general  in  its  character, 
and  the  latter  equally  specific  ;  and  this  render- 
ing would  not  obviate  the  incongruous  relation 
between  the  contents  of  the  former  half  of  the 
verse  and  those  of  the  latter,  which  exists  in 
any  case.—  Chap  xi.  1.  Also  I  in  the  first  year 
of  Darius  the  Mede,  even  1,  stood  to  confirm 

and  to  strengthen  him,  or,  "  -is  I  also 

stood  by  him  as  a  supporter  and  helper ;  "  pro- 
perly, "  and  I  also."  "^^S*]  begins  a  new  sen- 
tence (cf.  Psa.  XXX.  7  ;  Job  xix.  20)  which  does 
not  stand  in  an  adversative  relation  to  the  pre- 
ceding verse  (Hitzig),  nor  serve  to  explain  it 
(Luther,  etc.),  but  which  is  compnratice.  It 
describes  the  relation  by  which  the  angel  who 
now  speaks  and  Michael,  the  prince  of  Israel, 
assisted  each  other,  as  being  reciprocal.  "'~?7 
serves   to   repeat   the  "^r?*,    without    regard   to 

.sequence,  "and  I my  utandiiig  wns  as 

his  support,"  etc.  Cf.  Job  ix.  27  ;  Zeph  iii.  20  ; 
and  respecting  the  use  of  ""?  seiisii  bellico  s. 
militnri  cf.  supra,  v.  13  and  chap.  viii.  25. — jj 
"to  him."  Hiivemick  and  Hitzig  propose  to 
refer  this  particle  to  '■^'l^"'.'!  rather  than  to 
Michael,  because  the  strong  terms  TH'O  and 
P"!n?  are  supposed  to  warrant  the  conclusion 
that  the  one  to  whose  support  he  came  was  a 
being  inferior  to  the  a.ssisting  angel,  which  would 
not  apply  to  the  relation  of  the  latter  to  Michael. 
But  in  view  of  all  the  teaching  of  this  section,  a 
martial  angelic  prince  may  well  be  in  occasional 
need  of  the  aid  and  support  of  another,  without 
being  inferior  to  the  latter  on  that  account ;  and 
in  support  of  the  view  that  Michael,  the  guar- 
dian angel  of  Israel,  was  oliliged  to  put  forth 
special  efforts  in  behalf  of  his  wards,  and  there- 
fore required  the  assistance  of  other  good  augelio 
powers  to  an  unusual  degree,  precisely  "in  the 
first  year  of  Darius  the  Mede,"  or  at  the  period 
when  the  world-power  passed  from  the  Chaldse- 
ans  to  the  Medo-Persians,  it  will  be  sufficient  to 


232 


TUE  PKOPHET  DANIEL. 


refer  to  chap.  vi.  and  to  chap.  is.  1  et  seq.  (cf. 
Zech.  i.  12).  CE.  Hofmann,  Schriftbetc,  I.  289, 
and  also  FiiUer,  p.  279  :  "  The  first  verse  of 
chap.  xi.  is  thus  intimately  connected  with  the 
last  verse  of  chap.  x.  ;  and  it  was  unwise  to 
separate  them,  and  thereby  to  confuse  the  train 
of  thought  (by  referring  li  to  Darius  the  Mede). 
If  it  be  asked,  what  interests  were  at  stake  in 
the  first  year  of  Darius,  the  an.swer  will  be,  the 
position  which  the  new  dynasty  should  occupy 
toward  tlie  people  of  Israel.  And  it  may  be  seen 
from  the  narrative  in  chap.  \-i.  that  efforts  were 
made  in  that  particular  year  to  place  it  in  a  hos- 
tile attitude  toward  that  people.  It  was  in  that 
juncture  that  the  good  angel  of  the  world-power 
stood  by  Michael,  the  prince  of  Israel,  until  he 
prevailed  ;  in  the  coming  conflict  Michael  shall 
support  him." 


ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES  RELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLO- 
GETICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETIUAL 
SUGGESTIONS. 

1.  The  characteristic  and  leading  feature  of 
the  contents  of  this  section  is  angelological  in  its 
nature.  An  angelic  being  is  introduced  and  de- 
scribed in  an  unusually  minute  and  life-like  man- 
ner, whom  we  ( see  on  vs.  5  and  1 8)  cannot  regard 
as  being  identical  with  the  Gabriel  of  chapters 
viii.  and  ix. ,  nor  yet  with  Michael,  to  whom  he 
repeatedly  refers  in  the  communications  ad- 
dressed by  him  to  Daniel;  but  the  important 
disclosures  made  by  this  being  respecting  the 
nature  and  functions  of  several  leading  repre- 
sentatives of  the  angelic  world,  and  the  exalted 
rank  and  powerful  influence  within  that  world 
claimed  by  him,  no  less  than  his  tremendous  in- 
fluence on  the  fortunes  of  earthly  empires,  jus- 
tifv  the  careful  description  of  which  he  is  the 
object  (vs.  .5-7).  as  well  as  the  expressions  of 
profound  reverence  addressed  to  him  by  Daniel 
(according  to  vs.  8-11  ;  15-19).  These  expres- 
sions, together  with  the  counteracting  efforts  of 
the  angel  called  forth  by  them,  by  wh'ch  he 
designed  to  strengthen  and  encourage  the  terri- 
fied and  overwhelmed  prophet,  are  analogous  to 
the  incidents  connected  vrith  the  appearance  of 
Gabriel  to  Daniel  in  chap.  viii.  15  et  seq.  ;  but 
while  the  prophet's  fainting  and  his  restoration 
by  Gabriel  occurred  but  once  in  that  instance 
(see  on  v.  18),  the  same  features  appear  thrice 
in  this  connection,  leading  to  the  conclusion 
that  this  nameless  angelic  prince  is  of  extraordi- 
nary importance,  and  at  least  equals,  if  he  does 
not  outrank  Michael,  the  "  captain  of  the  Lord's 
host"  (Josh.  V.  13).  As  the  latter  comes  to  his 
assistance  (vs.  13,  21),  so  he  affords  aid  to  that 
prince  in  return  (chap.  xi.  1)  in  the  conflict  with 
the  ' '  princes  "  of  Persia  and  Javan,  the  angels 
who  fight  against  God  at  the  head  of  the  heathen 
world-power.  The  latter  likewise  appear  to  be 
possessed  of  exalted  power,  and  therefore  as  ter- 
rible spiritual  beings  who  are  dangerous  to  the 
kingdom  of  God  and  its  representatives.  They 
are  powerful  diemons  who  bear  the  name  CiiC 
"princes,  archangels,"  by  virtue  of  their  influ- 
ential rank  in  the  kingdom  of  darkness,  with  as 
much  propriety  as  do  Gabriel.  Michael,  etc. ,  by 
virtue  of  their  position  in  the  kingdom  of  light. 


The  power  of  the  evil  angels,  however,  is  only 
transient  and  perishable.  like  that  of  the  em- 
pires over  which  they  rule,  while  the  angelic 
princes  of  light,  Michael  and  the  nameless  one, 
who  stand  in  the  service  of  God.  triumph  over 
them  all  in  succession,  although  the  victory  may 
only  be  achieved  by  effort  and  determined  con- 
flict. 
But  who  is  this  nameless  one,  this  mysterious 

being,  to  whom  not  even  the  predicate  ^'^  is 
applied,  although  doubtless  belonging  to  him,  to 
say  nothing  of  a  definite  nomen  propriuni  being 
assigned  to  him  ? — Are  we,  in  connection  with 
many  older  expositors  (e.j.,  Vitringa,  C.  B. 
MichaeUs,  Rambach,  Starke,  etc.),  to  identify 
him  with  Christ,  the  ''  uncreated  angel  of  the 
Lord,"   whom  Daniel   repeatedly  addressed   as 

''IlK,  and  whose  description  is  said  to  be  strik- 
ingly similar  to  that  of  the  "  Son  of  man  "  in 
chap,  vii  13  et  seq.  (with  which  compare  espe- 
cially vs.  16,  18),  and  also  to  that  of  Christ  in 
the  Apocalypse  (Rev.  i.  13-18  ;  x.  1-0)  ?  Thia 
opinion  is  at  all  events  more  probable  than  that 
of  the  interpreters  who  identify  Michael  instead 
with  Christ  (Melancthon,  Geier,  Jo.  Lange.  Neu- 
bauer,  Dinput.  de  Michaele  archangelo,  Hiiver- 
nick,  etc. )  ;  but  it  is  opposed,  and  the  created 
nature  of  the  angel  is  implied,  by  the  following 
considerations  :  (1)  he  describes  himself  in  v.  11 
as  a  mesnenger  sent  from  God  to  bear  a  Divine 
message  to  Daniel  (similar  to  Gabriel  in  chap, 
viii.  l(i  et  seq.  ;  ix.  30  et  seq.  >  :  (2)  his  difficulty 
in  combating  the  protecting  angels  of  the  world- 
powers,  even  necessitating  his  being  supported 
by  other  angelic  princes,  contrasts  strongly  with 
the  manner  in  which  the  former  visions  describe 
the  triumph  of  Christ  over  the  world-empires 
opposed  to  him  ;  see  especially  chap.  ii.  44  et 
seq.  and  chap.  vii.  13,  22,  26  ;  (3)  the  circum- 
stance already  noticed  in  v.  10,  that  the  address 
"  my  lord,"  together  with  the  other  features  of 
the  description  which  aim  at  the  exaltation  and 
glorifying  of  this  angel,  are  elsewhere  applied  to 
angels  who  were  certainly  created  ;  e.g.,  in  Josh. 
V.  14.  to  the  captain  of  the  Lord's  host ;  Judg. 
vL  13,  to  the  angel  who  appeared  to  Gideon; 
Judg.  xiii.  8,  to  the  angel  whom  Manoah  saw ; 
cf.  also  Rev.  xix.  10 ;  xxii.  8  et  seq.  We  shall 
consequently  be  compelled  to  assume  that  the 
messenger  sent  from  God  to  Daniel,  as  here  in- 
troduced, was  an  angel  proper,  and  distinct  from 
the  Son  of  God  (see  Jerome,  Theodoret,  and  a 
majority  of  church  fathers,  on  this  passage). 
But  what  position  of  rank  and  power  is  to  be 
attributed  to  him.  or — in  case  he  is  at  once  co- 
ordinated with  Michael  and  Gabriel  in  these 
respects  (as  we  have  done  on  v.  5).  and  is  there- 
fore regarded  as  an  archangel — what  particular 
office  and  functions  are  to  be  assigned  to  him,  is 
after  all  a  difficult;  question,  and  can  hardly  be 
answered  with  full  exegetical  certainty.  The 
range  of  the  angel's  activity  would  become  too 
limited  if  he  were  identified  with  the  third  of  the 
archangels  mentioned  by  name  in  the  Old  Test., 
beside  Gabriel  and  Michael,  viz.  :  with  the  Ra- 
phael of  the  apocryphal  book  Tobit.  or  if  he 
were  degraded  to  the  rank  of  a  mere  guardian 
angel  over  Egypt  (Hitzig;  see  on  v.  30).  On 
the  other  hand,  his  authority  would  become  too 
extensive,  and  his  position  too  exalted,  if  he  were 
conceived  of  as  the  mighty  governor  of  all  earthly 


CHAP.  X.  1— XX.   1. 


233 


nature,  the  Divinely  appointed  ruler  and  spiri- 
tual g\iide  of  the  whole  terrestrial  world,  thus 
assigning  to  him  a  sphere  similar  to  that  occu- 
pied by  the  demiurge  of  the  Gnostics,  or  the 
••earth-spirit"  of  Goethe  in  his  prologue  to 
F'liiist,  or  to  that  given  by  the  ingenious  natural 
philosopher,  Max  Perty  (in  his  work  iiber  die 
myatlsriieii  ErscheiiiHiigeii  cUr  memcldicheii  Na- 
tiir,  18(i2),  to  the  (jeodivmoii.,  the  regent  of  our 
planet,  who  Ls  regarded  as  the  spiritual  principle 
that  presides  over  the  earth,  the  human  race, 
and  the  development  of  both.  To  assume  such 
an  earth-spirit,  which  is  neither  Scriptural  nor 
natural,  and  which  h-is  no  support  even  in  the 
magical  and  mystical  phenomena  of  human  life 
(cf .  the  thorough  criticism  of  this  hypothesis  in 
t.  Giesebrecht's  lecture  on  Das  Wund-er  in  der 
deutschen  GeschicJitbesehreibung  neuerer  Zeit, 
Stettin,  1868,  p.  10  et  seq.),  would  be  to  disre- 
gard the  tenor  of  this  section,  as  certainly  as  it 
characterizes  the  angel  as  being  decidedly  super- 
natural, and  at  the  same  time  (in  v.  5  et  seq. ) 
endows  him  with  external  attributes  of  his  rank 
such  as  would  be  but  poorly  ad.apted  to  the  posi- 
tion and  functions  of  a  telluric  planetary  spirit. 
— Accordingly,  it  any  particular  explanation 
whatever  of  the  nature  and  office  of  this  angel 
is  to  be  attempted,  the  opinion  of  Hofmann 
which  was  noticed  above,  on  v.  5,  is  to  be  de- 
cidedly preferred  to  all  others  (  Weismgung  uitd 
Erfmung,  I.  'i\i  et  seq.  ;  Schriftbeieeis,  I.  287 
et  seq. ).  That  opinion  has  also  been  adopted 
by  Auberlen  (Dniiiel.  etc.,  p.  67),  Fuller,  Baum- 
garten,  Luthardt,  Riggenbach  (on  3  Thess.  ii. 
6),  and  others.  It  assumes  that  the  angel  in 
question  represents  "  •  the  go<jd  spirit  of  the  heathen 
world-power,"  while  the  '•  princes  "  of  Persia  and 
Javan  opposed  by  him  and  Michael,  represent 
the  evil  principle  which  is  hostile  to  God,  and 
which  manifests  itself  in  the  development  of 
the  heathen  world-power.  The  former  is  that 
"  power  in  nature  which  operates  in  favor  of 
God's  kingdom  throughout  the  heathen  world," 
the  '•good  spirit,  which  is  to  promote  in  the 
heathen  world  the  realization  of  God's  purpose 
of  salvation  ;  "  the  latter  are  powers  opposed  to 
God,  who  seek  to  cross  and  neutralize  the  plans 
of  God  and  of  the  good  angel,  which  aim  at  the 
salvation  of  the  world.  The  former  is  the  re- 
straining principle  {to  narix"^',  2  Thess.,  1.  c. ) 
which  restrains  and  prevents  the  ascendancy  and 
prevalence  of  the  height  of  Satanic  wickedness 
in  human  history  ;  the  latter,  on  the  contrary, 
endeavor  to  hinder  ami  retard  the  progress  of 
the  kingdom  of  God.  We  regard  this  view  as 
harmonizing  well  with  the  contents  of  the  chap- 
ter before  us.  and  can  permit  a  partial  departure 
from  it  only  in  so  far  as  (1 )  we  must  consider  it 
doubtful  whether  St.  P.iul  intended  to  definitely  | 
and  consciously  allude  precisely  to  the  angel  here  j 
described  bj'  the  word  mnxur  or  Kare xor\  (2)  I 
so  far  as  we  regard  the  conflict  of  the  angel  with 
those  foes  as  an  acttiid  irarfare  in  the  invisible  ' 
regions  of  the  .spirit-world,  and  not  as  a  mere 
supplanting  in  the  favor  of  the  king  and  his  ! 
court,  because  of  the  termini  bellid  employed  in  I 
vs.  VA  and  20  et  seq.  ;  (:l)  so  far  as  we  are  com- 
pelled to  regard  the  foes  against  whom  the  angel 
contended,  as  being  the  actual  spiritual  protec- 
tors of  the  world-kingdoms  in  question,  and  as 
dEemonic  powers  or  Satanic  angels,  who  have 
entered   on   a   permanent  connecticm  with   the 


kingdoms  over  which  they  rule,  in  consequence 
of  which  they  stemd  or  fall  with  them  (ct.  on  v. 
IS).  The  idea  of  guardian  angels,  or,  more 
exactly,  the  idea  of  certain  daemonic  spiritual 
beings  (a; ){/.;«  '^urar,  2  Cor.  xii.  7|  as  being  at 
the  head  of  the  antitheistic  world-monarchie.i 
and  as  fundamentally  opposed  to  Michael,  the 
prince  of  the  theocracy,  is  not  only  countenanced 
by  the  leading  authorities  of  the  older  exegetical 
tradition  (Luther,  Melanc,  Calov,  Geier,  C.  B. 
Michaelis,  Starke,  and  in  substance  also  Jerome, 
Theodoret,  and  the  older  Eom.on  Catholic  ex- 
positors, excepting  that  they  mistake  the  Satanic 
evil  character  of  the  "  princes  "  of  Persia,  etc., 
to  a  greater  or  less  extent),  but  it  is  likewise 
based  on  all  the  passages  in  both  the  Old  and 
New-Test.  Scriptures,  which  represent  the  gods 
of  the  heathen  world  as  dsemons,  and  conse- 
quently, the  heathen  lands  or  states  over  which 
they  rule  and  exercise  spiritual  authority  as 
being  provinces  of  the  kingdom  of  darkness  (cf. 
the  ex]>ositors  of  1  Cor.  viii.  6  ;  x.  20  et  seq. , 
especially  Kling,  vol.  7  of  the  New-Test,  part  of 
the  Bible- work)." 

2.  This  estimate  of  the  contents  of  the  chap- 
ter does  not  affect  its  credibility,  nor  does  it 
oblige  us  to  conclude  that  the  section  originated 
at  the  hands  of  a  pseudo-Daniel  in  the  Macca- 
beean  age.  Fuller's  remarks  on  these  points,  p. 
272  et  seq.,  are  especially  pertinent.  We  trans- 
fer to  this  place  an  epitome  of  this  author's 
apology  for  lie  doctrine  of  angels,  as  contained 
in  this  section,  although  it  is  connected  with 
views  that  diverge  somewhat  from  ours,  and 
that  especially  contain  no  correct  estimate  of 
the  idea  of  guardian  angels  :  ' '  This  is  the  mean- 
rag  of  our  text.  Shall  we  coiLsider  it  a  rabbini- 
cal idea  and  a  Jewish  fable  ?  I  caimoteven  find 
that  it  is  entirely  foreign  to  our  modem  concep- 
tions. Do  we  not  frequently  speak  of  the  spirit 
that  reigns  in  the  influential  circles  of  a  court '? 
Is  it  not  well  under-stood  that  propositions  which 
conflict  with  that  spirit  have  no  prospect  of  be- 
ing approved,  unless  the  prevailing  spirit  should 
be  superseded  by  a  different  one ':'  That  is 
exactly  what  the  text  affirms — although  cer- 
tainly with  a  difference ;  for  our  age  speaks  of 
spirit  without  understanding  a  personal  spiri- 
tual being  by  that  term.  '  Spirit '  is  a  current 
word  in  its  mouth,  but  it  becomes  embarra.«sed 
when  asked  how  it  conceives  of  spirit.  As  (iod, 
in  the  consciousness  of  modern  times,  has  taken 

•  IThe  vagueness  and  indecision  of  this  interpretation  of 
the  "  prince  '•  in  question  is  no  less  an  objection  to  it  than 
its  evidently  hejithenish  character.  The  author's  arguments 
adduced  above  against  the  common  view  which  identities 
this  angelx  prince  with  Christ  himself  are  entirely  incon- 
clusive: for  (1)  Jesus  likewise  calls  himself  a  metseitt/er  of 
God  (John  iii.  17,  34) ;  (2)  the  Son  of  CrOil  himself  did  not 
disdain  angelic  aid  (Matt.  iv.  11;  Luke  xxii.  4-^);  (o)  the 
other  O.-T.  instances  cited  (especially  Josh.  v.  14)  are  clearly 
allusions  to  the  Mes-sianic  theophany.  *'  This  heavenly 
form  has  thus,  it  is  true,  the  shining  white  talar  common  to 
the  angel.  E?A.*k.  ix.  J),  but  all  the  other  features,  as  prede- 
scribed — the  rhining  of  the  boily.  the  brightness  of  his 
countenant^e.  his  eyes  like  a  lamp  'of  fire,  arras  and  feet  like 
glittering  brass  the  sound  of  his  speaking — all  these  point 
to  the  revebition  of  the  ,•^^,'^^  "123,  the  glorious  appear- 
ance of  the  I.urd.  Ezek.  i.,  and  teach  us  that  the  Is'iS  seen 

by  Daniel  was  no  common  angel-prince,  but  a  manifestation 
of  Jehovah,  i.e.,  the  Logos.  This  is  placed  b<^yond  a  doubt 
by  a  comparison  witti  Rev.  i.  iri-lo,  where  the  form  of  the 
Son  of  man,  whom  John  saw  walking  in  the  midst  of  tl^e 
golden  candlesticks,  is  described  like  the  glorious  appear- 
ance seen  by  Ezeldel  and  Daniel '"  (Keil).l 


234 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


refuge  in  the  guise  of  a  universal  spirit,  of  which 
it  nia.v  be  affirmed  that  it  is,  and  that  it  is  not, 
with  equal  propriety,  so  the  spirits  are  involved 
in  a  similar  predicament ;  they  have  dissolved 
into  vapor.  The  Scriptures,  however,  teach  a 
different  doctrine.  They  have  and  know  a  per- 
isi'/i'tl  (Jod  and  personal  spirits,  and  teach  that 
tlie  latter  include  some  who  do  the  will  of  God, 
while  others  resist  it.  If  we  assume  accordingly 
tliat  such  spirits  exUt,  it  will  not  surprise  any 
mind  that  they  should  be  active  and  influential 
(of.  Gen.  xxxii.  1  et  seq.  ;  2  Kiugs  vi.  17,  etc.). 
....  According  to  the  Scriptures  as  a  whole, 
the  angels  are  the  agents  through  whom  God  gov- 
erns the  world,  and  they  are  concerned  in  many 
things  where  we  do  not  suspect  their  presence. 
The  only  new  feature  in  the  passage  is  that  they 
are  employed  in  influencing  the  decisions  of  the 
rulers  of  the  world  ;  but  this  is  not  surprising, 
since  they  are  concerned  to  realize  or  prevent 
the  Divine  purposes.  The  world-power  inter- 
feres in  the  fortunes  of  Israel ;  should  God 
quietly  look  on  while  His  will  is  counteracted  ? 
lu  such  a  case  he  opposes  the  evil  spirit  by  His 
spirit,  so  that  spirit  combats  against  spirit,"  etc. 
— Auberleu  expresses  ideas  exactly  similar,  p. 
67  :  "The  Holy  Scriptures  only  ask  of  us  that 
we  should  take  in  a  real  sense  the  language  we 
are  accustomed  to  employ  in  a  figurative  sense, 
respecting  a  conflict  of  the  good  and  the  evil 
spirit  in  man.  Similar  ideas  prevail  in  1  Sam. 
xvi.  13.15  ;  1  Kings  xxii.  23  ;  the  Satanic  influ- 
ences with  which  we  become  better  acquainted 
through  the  words  of  Jesus  and  the  apo.stles  are 
nothiug  different  in  their  nature.  This  does  not 
irgue  that  the  freedom  of  human  action  is  there- 
by destroyed ;  for  the  influence  of  spirits  over 
the  inner  nature  of  man  is  not  irresistible,  and 
their  principal  attention  may  perhaps  be  given 
to  the  shaping  of  external  cu'cumstauces.  The 
question  concerning  the  relation  of  the  Divine 
government  to  the  freedom  of  man  does  not  be- 
come more  difficult  by  the  additional  feature  of 
the  service  of  angels,  but,  on  the  contrary,  be- 
comes more  intelligible." — Cf.  also  Blumhardt, 
Ueber  die  Leh  re  von  den  Engeln,  in  Vilmar's  Pas- 
tond-Theol  BUittern.  1865,  I.  p.  33 :  "  If  Christ 
is  presented  to  us  as  he  who  shall  reign  until  all 
his  foes  are  made  the  footstool  for  his  feet,  his 
reigning  is  always  realized  through  the  means 
of  angels  who  are  sent  forth,  and  over  whom  is 
placed  a  special  angel,  Michael  being  prominent 
among  them  :  and  the  fact  that  so  little  is  said 
respecting  the  persons  of  the  warring  angels, 
who  must  be  regarded  as  constantly  reappear- 
ing, produces  in  us  the  more  positive  and  ele- 
vating impression,  as  it  is  always  the  same  bat- 
tle Iiora  the  beginning  and  down  to  the  consum- 
mation of  God's  kingdom,  when  he  shall  have 
put  down  all  opposing  rule,  and  all  authority  and 
power  il  Cor.  xv.  24).  In  this  light  we  learn  to 
losi^  sight  of  the  strangeness  of  a  name  also,  e.g. , 
that  of  Michael  ('who  is  like  God?'),  and  see 
that  the  names  found  in  the  Scriptures  have  not 
the  slightest  connection  with  the  follies  of  the 
Jewish  doctrine  concerning  angels,  which  in- 
cludes extended  registers  of  angels'  names.  But 
we  also  learn  how  easy  it  is,  when  the  Word  is 
carefully  and  thoroughly  studied,  to  set  aside 
the  sneering  objections  of  opponents,  who  judge 
everything  superficially  by  its  appearance,  and 
are  ready  to  throw  it  into  the  himber-rnom  nf 


superstitions,  if  we  only  guard  against  being 
moved  from  our  simplicity  by  the  power  of  a 
worldly  wisdom  that  overlooks  the  kernel  of 
everything." 

3.  Nor  does  the  chapter  contaui  anything  aside 
from  the  doctrine  of  angels  that  is  not  well 
adapted  to  the  time  of  Daniel,  and  to  the  cap- 
tive prophet  Daniel  as  its  author.  This  has 
already  been  shown  "with  reference  to  several 
particulars.  It  only  remains  to  call  attention  to 
the  alleged  "historical  improbability"  contained 
in  V.  1,  that  Daniel  did  not  return  to  the  holy 
land  with  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua,  as  being  a 
circumstance  that  on  the  contrary  lends  very 
Uttle  support  to  the  Maccaba;an-tendency  hy- 
pothesis. For  while  it  is  a  sufficient  explanation 
of  that  fact  that  the  aged  and  esteemed  prophet 
remained  at  Babylon  for  the  special  purpose  of 
promoting  the  welfare  of  his  compatriots  and  of 
the  theocracy  (see  on  that  passage),  it  is  cer- 
tainly improbable  that  a  writer  of  the  Macca- 
bsean  period,  who  should  have  invented  this  nar- 
rative in  the  interest  of  a  tendency,  would  have 
left  his  hero  in  a  strange  land,  among  the  many 
indifferent  and  apostate  ones  (cf.  1  Mace.  i.  13 
et  seq.  ;  xliv.  55),  when  a  suitable  opportunity 
was  presented  for  his  return,  and  while  his  own 
heart  was  animated  with  a  glowing  love  for  the 
"pleasant  land"  ("i^a"7".^)  chap.  viii.  9;  xi. 
16). — The  zeaXons  fasting ot  Daniel  (v.  2  et  seq.) 
serves  as  little  as  the  circumstance  above  re- 
ferred to,  to  render  probable  the  composition  of 
the  chapter  in  the  Maccabjean  age ;  for  the  pro- 
phet's fasting  does  not  bear  an  ascetic  and  work- 
righteous  character,  such  as  was  adapted  to  the 
spirit  of  the  later  Judaism,  and  especially  to  the 
Alexandrian  Judaism,  inasmuch  as  the  cause  of 
the  gracious  acceptance  of  the  supplicant  while 
yearning  for  deliverance,  is  shown  by  v.  13  to 
have  been,  not  his  fasting,  but  the  fervent  and 
persistent  prayer  which  accompanied  it.  In  this 
character  of  a  mere  accompaniment  and  outward 
sign  of  sorrow  because  of  national  and  religious 
misfortunes,  fasting  (together  with  related 
usages  connected  with  mourning,  e.g.,  abstain- 
ing from  anointing,  the  wearing  of  sackcloth, 
sitting  in  ashes,  etc.)  was  practised,  long  prior 
to  the  captivity,  by  the  earliest  representatives 
of  the  prophetic  order,  such  as  Elijah,  Joel, 
Isaiah,  etc.  (cf.  1  Kings  xvii.  6 ;  xix.  4  et  seq.  ; 
Joel  i.  14;  ii.  13;  Isa.  xx.  3  et  seq.);  so  that 
the  similar  conduct  of  Daniel,  which  becomes 
additionally  appropriate  in  view  of  its  being  con- 
nected with  the  occurrence  of  the  feast  of  the 
Passover,  does  not  seem  remarkable  or  untimely 
in  the  least. — In  opposition  to  Hitzig's  assertion 
that  the  remarks  of  the  angel  in  chap.  x.  21; 
xi.  1,  contain  an  allusion  to  the  political  rela- 
tions of  Egypt  with  Syria  and  Palestine  in  the 
Maccabaian  period,  see  supra,  on  these  pas- 
sages. 

4.  The  ■lonnHetieal  treatment  of  the  chapter 
wUI  have  regard  primarily  and  principally  to  its 
angelological  features.  In  this  respect  attention 
will  naturally  be  directed  less  to  the  nature  and 
employment  of  the  angels  brought  to  our  notice 
than  to  their  relation  to  the  designs  and  modes 
of  operation  of  the  Picine  proridi nee  which  em- 
ploys them  as  instruments  in  its  service.  7'/ie 
influence  of  Oud  on  the  fortunes  of  the  world- 
empires  and  the  decisions  of  t/ieir  rulers,  as  being 


CHAP.  XI.  2-45. 


exerted  thr»ugli  the  afjency  of  angels,  and  as  em- 
ploying the  jiower  of  the  mighty  princes  of  the 
spirit- trorld  for  the  welfare  of  7111111 — such  wUl 
probably  be  the  theme  of  a  meditation  ou  the 
contents  of  the  section  as  a  whole.  In  connec- 
tion with  this  it  will  be  proper  to  refer  to  pas- 
sages like  Paa.  xxxiv.  3  ;  ciii.  30  et  seq. ;  Heb. 
i.  14.  etc.,  .ind  to  illustrate  and  enforce  them  in 
their  profound  truth  and  comforting  power,  by 
the  subject  of  this  chapter. 

Homilctical  suggestions  on  pai-ticular passages  : 
On  V.  1,  Melancthon  :  "  Nova  vi^io  exhibetur  jam 
Daniel,  non  solum  ut  ipse  et  caleri  pii  in  hoc  prte- 
senti  perieriio  conjirmentur,  sed  etiam  et  posteritas 
piramnneiilur  de  pracipnis  mutntionibus  imperi- 
orum  etde  iis  adnmitntibus,  qua  Judrrtf,  impende- 

bant Hnbes  Ecdesice  imnginem,    quam 

Jjeus  milt  et  exerceri  affiietionihus  et  fide  expec- 
tare  liberationem.  Et  cum  liberat,  tameii  even- 
tus  -non  respondent  nostris  conjecturis.  Cum 
Cyri  beneficium  Jmpeditum  esset,  postea  magis 
conspici  potuit.  a  Deo  gubernari  hanc  liberatio- 
7i,em,  cum  tot  impedimenta  incidissent,  quae  huma- 
nis  consiliis  toUi  non  poterant." 

Ou  V.  3,  Jerome  :  ' '  Secundum  anagogen  vero 
doc  dicendum  est,  quod  qui  in  luctu  est  et  sponsi 
luget  absentiam,  non  comedit  panem  desiderabi- 
Lm,  qui  de  ccelo  descendit,  neque  solidum  capit 
f-ibum.  qui  intelligitur  in  came,  nee  bibil  ninum, 
quod  latificat  cor  hominis,  nee  exfiilarat  faciem 
tn  oleo  (Ps.  civ.  15).  Boe  autem  jejunio  sponsa 
impetrabiles  facit  laerimas,  quondo  sponsus  fuerit 
ablatvs  ab  ea."  etc. — Cramer:  "To  fast  and 
prepare  the  body  is  indeed  a  proper  external  dis- 
;ipliue,  not  to  deserv'e  something  thereby,  as  the 
Papists  do,  but  in  order  to  a  stUl  better  prepa- 
ration ;  Matt.  VL  IT  et  seq." 

On  V.  4,  Geier :  "Juxta  huncflumum  sefiiisse 
•licit  prophda,  jejunio  hactemis  maceratus  preci- 
ousque  racans  devotis,  sine  dubio,  ut  animum 
nonnihil  recrearet  hac  loci  jucundioris  contempla- 
tione,  si  quidem  ad  huj'ismodi  finviorum  ripas 
timani  nonnunqvam  dnntur  colles,  calles  aut 
nuci  arboribus  consiti,  tibi  undarum  suaviter  au- 
diuiitur  susurri ndioque  non  exigua  .nrnul  suppe- 
■iitatur  ansa  reculendi  benejicia  tarn  creationis, 
}uam  conservationis  redemtionis,"  etc.  Cf.  Psa. 
oxxxvii.  1  et  seq.  ;  Ezek.  i.  1  etc. 

On  V.  8  et  seq.,  Calvin  :  "  Dexis  non  idea  ter- 
ret  suos,  quoniam  ipsum  oblectet  nostra  periur- 
^atio,  sed  quoniam  id  nobis  utile  est,  quia  scilicit 


nnnquam  erim'us  idonei  ad  discendum,  nui  came 
nostra  prorsus  subacta.  Hoc  autem  necesse  fieri 
'oiolento  modo  propter  pervicaciam  nobis  ingeni- 
<«»!."— Starke  :  •'  Behold  in  this  the  goodness 
and  friendliness  of  God,  who  not  only  knows 
how  to  terrify,  but  also  causes  the  terrified  onee 
to  be  comforted  and  strengthened  !  " 

On  V.  11,  Theodoret :  Ka'/M  avrbv  oh  Ba?-ac!ap, 
(i/J.(i  AavitfX'  70  /til'  yap  yv  XaAdaiuv,  to  de 
'E,.?pa/wv  bvotta'  Kal  to  fiev  vno  ei'GE,3uv  eri^^,  rb 
di  {'TO  fh'arrelSfJv  —pntjerei^t/. — Starke  :  "It  is  dif- 
ficult for  a  timid  and  sorrowful  heart  to  appro- 
priate to  itself  the  Divine  comfort ;  wherefore 
God  sometimes  calls  them  by  name  ;  cf .  Acts  x. 
31." 

On  v.  13,  Jerome  (see  .supra,  on  that  passage). 
— Melancthon  :  "  Angelus  pins  luirrat  Danieli, 
se  dimicasse  cum  principe  Persarum.  i.e.,  cum 
diabolo  moliente  dissipationes  regni  Pcrsici.  Etsi 
enim  ignoramus,  quomodo  inter  se  pugnent  boni 
et  mali  spiritus,  tamen  certamina  esse  non  dubium 
est,  sice  disputation e  fiant.  site  aliis  tnodis.  Ait 
ergo  bontis  Angelus  repressmn  a  se  esse  malum 
spirifum,  qui  Camhysen  jurenem  et  atilicos  impios 
incitabat,  vel  ad  delendam  gentem  Judaicam,  vel 
ad  interficiendum  Daniekm,  vel  ad  alias  malas 
actiones  tentandas,  qum  novos  motus  in  regno  al- 
Uitiirm  erant." — Auberlen,  Blumhardt,  Fuller 
(see  supra,  No.  3). 

On  V.  15  et  seq.,  Starke :  "  If  needless  terror 
and  alarm  can  deprive  a  pious  soul  of  his  speech, 
is  it  a  wonder  that  wicked  persons  shall  be  dumb 
when  Christ  addresses  them  with  the  words, 
Friend,  how  camest  thou  in  hither,  etc. '?  (Matt. 
xxii.  13). — If  God  does  not  first  open  our  lips, 
either  directly  or  indirectly,  we  shall  be  nnable 
to  speak  what  pleases  Him  (Rom.  viU.  36  ;  x. 
15)." 

Ou  v.  20  et  seq.,  Melancthon  :  '■'■  Hiec  exempla 
ostendunt  satis  mquictam  fuisse  proeinciam. 
Fuerunt  igitur  et  angeUrrum  certamina,  quimalos 
spiritus,  sedilionum  et  discordiarum  inflamma- 
tores  depeUebant." — Starke:  ''When  one  king- 
dom of  the  world  has  been  destroyed,  Satan  wUl 
reign  through  another  ;  and  thus  the  church  is 
compelled  to  contend  constantly  against  the 
prince  of  this  world,  until  all  kingdoms  shall 
belong  to  God  and  Christ. — The  fact  that  the 
power  of  angels  is  limited  appears  from  their 
requiring  the  assistance  of  others." 


0.  Detailed  prophetic  descriptiott  of  the  Persian  and  Qrcecian  world-kingdoms,  and  also  of  the  king- 
doms which  should  arise  from  the  latter,  together  toith  their  conflicts. 

Chap.  XI.  2-45. 

2  And  now  will  I  shew  thee  the  truth.  Behold,  there  shall  stand  i(p  yet  three 
kings  in  [to]  Persia;  and  the  fourth  shall  be  far  richer  than  they  .all:  and  by 
[accordiiiii'  to]  liis  strength  through  [by]  his  riches  he  shall  stir  u])  all  [the 
whole]  ag^ainsi  [with]  the  realm  of  Grrecia  [kingdom  of  Javan]. 

3  And  a  iniuhly  king  [a  king,  a  hero]  shall  stand  up,  that  shall  rule  with  great 

4  dominion  [rule],  and  do  according  to  his  will.  And  when  he  shall  stand  uj), 
his  kinadom  shall  be  broken,  and  shall  be  divided  [partitioned]  toward  the  four 
winds  of  heaven  [tlie  heavens] ;  .and  not  to  his  posterity,  nor  according  to  his 
dominion  [i-nle]  which  he  ruled:  for  his  kingdom  shall  be  plucked  up,  even  for 
[and  given  to]  others  besides  those  [these]. 


i!36  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


5  .And  the.  kiiif;  of  tile  south  shall  be  strong,  and  [become]  one  of  his  princes  : 
and  he  shall  be  stronfj  above   liini,  and   have  dominion   [rule]  ;  his  dominion 

6  [rule]  shall  be  a  great  dominion  [rule].  And  in  [to]  the  end  of  years  they  shall 
join  [associate]  themselves  together  ■  for  [and]  the  king's  daughter  [daughter  o? 
the  king]  of  the  south  shall  come  to  the  king  of  the  north  to  make  an  agreement : 


I: 


but  Hmd]  she  shall  not  retain  the  power  of  the  arm  ;  neither  shall  he  stand,  noi 
']  his  arm;  but  [and]  she  shall  be  given  m^j,  and  they  that  brought  her,  and 
e  that  begat  her,  and  he  that  strengthened  her  in  these  [the]  times. 

7  But  [And]  out  of  a  branch  [shoot]  of  her  roots  shall  one  stand  up  in  his 
estate  [basis,  i.e.,  stead],  which  [and  he]  shall  come  with  an  army  [to  the  force], 
and  shall  enter  into  [come  in]  tlie  fortress  oi'  the  king  of  the  north,  and  shall  deal 

8  against  [do  with]  them,  and  shall  prevail  [strengthen  himself]  ;  and  shall  also 
carry  captives  [cause  to  go  in  the  captivity]  into  Egypt  their  gods,  with  their 
princes  [anointed  ones],  and  with  their  precious  [prized]  vessels  of  silver  and  of 

9  gold;  and  he'  shall  continue  [stand]  more  years  than  the  king  of  the  north.  So 
the  king  of  the  south  shall  come  into  his  kingdom  [And  he  shall  come  into  the 
kingdom  oi  the  king  of  the  south],  and  shall  return  into  his  own  land  [ground]. 

10  But  his  sons  shall  be  stirred  up  [strengthen  themselves],  and  shall  assemble 
a  multitude  of  great  forces :  and  one  shall  certainly  come,  and  ovei'flow,  and 
pass  through ;  then    [and]  shall   he  return,  and  be  stirred  up  [or,  they  shall 

11  strengthen  themselves],  even  to  his  [or,  their]  fortress.  And  llie  king  of  the 
south  shall  be  moved  with  choler  [become  very  bitter],  and  shall  come  forth 
and  fight  with  him,  even  with  the  king  of  the  north :  and  he  shall  set  forth  [cause 
to  stand]  a  great  multitude ;  but  the  multitude   shall  be  given  into  his  hand. 

12  And  when  he  hath  taken  aivay  the  multitude  [or,  the  multitude  shall  be  taken 
aiKay\  his  heart  shall  be  lifted  iq)  [or,  raised  tip] ;  and  he  shall  cast  down  [cause 
to  fall]  many  ten  thousands :  but  [and]  he  shall  not  be  strengthened  hy  it. 

13  For  [And]  the  king  of  the  north  shall  return  and  shall  set  forth  [cause  to 
stand]  a  multitude  greater  than  the  former,  and  shall  certainly  come  after  cer- 
tain [at  the  end  of  the  times  the]  years  with  a  great  army  [force]  and  with  much 

1-t  riches.  And  in  those  times  there  shall  many  stand  iqy  against  the  king  of  the 
south  :  also  [and]  the  robbers  [sons  of  tyrants]  of  thy  people  shall  exalt  them- 
selves [be  lifted  wjo]  to  establish  [cause  to  stand]  the  vision  ;  but  [and]  they 
shall  fall  [be  stumbled]. 

15  So  [And]  the  king  of  the  north  shall  come,  and  cast  up  [pour  out]  a  mount 
[mound],  and  take  [catch]  the  most  fenced  cities  [city  of  defences]  ;  and  the 
arms  of  the  south   shall   not  Mi'^/tstand,  neither  [and,  i.e.,  or]  his  chosen  people 

10   [the  people  of  his  choice],  neither  shall  there  he  any  strength  to  rt'i^Astand.     But 

And]  he  that  cometh  against  [to]  him  shall  do  according  to  his  own  will,  and 

none  shall  stand  before  him  ;  and   he  shall   stand  in  the  glorious  land  [land  of 

17  comeliness],  which  [and]  by  his  hand  [he]  shall  be  consumed.  He  shall  also 
[And  he  shall]  set  his  face  to  enter  [come]  with  the  strength  of  his  whole  king- 
dom, and  upright  ones'  with  him  ;  thus  [and]  shall  he  do  :  and  he  shall  give 
him  the  daughter  of  [the]  women,  corrupting  [to  corrupt,  or,  destroy]  her  ;  but 

18  [and]  she  shall  not  stand  on  /u'«  sirfe,  neither  [nor]  be  for  him.  After  this  [And] 
shall  he  turn  his  tacc  unto  the  isles,  and  shall  take  [catch]  many;  but  a  prince 
[general]  for  his  own  behalf  [iiis  reproach]  shall  cause  the  reproach  offered  by 
him  [for  him]  to  cease  ;  without  his  own  reproach  he  shall  cause  it  to  turn  upon 

19  [to]  him.  Then  [And]  he  shall  turn  his  face  toward  the  fort  [fortresses]  of  his 
own  land ;  but  [ami]  lie  shall  stumble  [be  stumbled]  and  fall,  and  not  be 
found. 

20  Then  [And]  shall  stand  up  in  his  estate  [on  his  basis,  i.e.,  stead]  a  raiser  of 
taxes  in  [one  causing  the  exactor  to  pass  through]  the  glory  of  the  kingdom  :  but 
within  itiw  days  [and  in  single  days]  he  shall  be  ilestroyed  [broken],  neither 
[and  not]  in  anger  nor  in  battle. 

21  And  in  his  estate  [on  his  basis,  i.e.,  stead]  shall  stand  up  a  vile  [despised] 
person,  to  whom  [and  on  him]  they  shall  not  give  the  honour  o^  the  kingdom  : 
but   [and]    he    shall    come    in    peaceably    [with    tranquillity],  and    obtain    [or 

22  strengthen]  the  kingdom  by  flatteries.     And  luith  the  arms  of  a  [the]  flood  shall 


CHAP.  XI.  2-45.  237 


they  be  overflown  from  before  liira,  anil  sliall  be  broken;  yea  [anl],  also  the 

23  prince  of  the  covenant.  And  after  the  leatjue  nuide  with  [from  the  covenanting 
to]  him  he  shall  worli  deca'nfulli/  :  for  [and]  he  sliall  come  np,  and  shall  become 

24  strong  with  a  small  people.  He  shall  enter  [come]  peaceably  [with  tranquillity] 
even  upon  [and  with]  the  fattest  places  of  the  province;  and  he  shall  do  that 
which  his  fathers  have  not  done,  nor  [and]  his  fathers'  fathers ;  he  shall  scatter 
amoncj  [to]  them  the  prey,  and  spoil,  and  riches;  yea,  and  he  shall  forecast 
[devise]  his  devices  against  the  strong  holds,  even  [and  i/tai]  for  [till]  a 
time. 

25  And  he  shall  stir  up  his  power  and  his  courage  [heart]  against  tJte  king  of  the 
south  with  a  gi-eat  army  [force] ;  and  the  king  of  tne  south  shall  be  stirred  up  to 
[the]  battle  witli  a  very  great  and  mighty  army  [force]  ;  but  [and]  he  shall  not 

26  stanil :  for  they  shall  forecast  [devise]  devices  against  him.  Yea  [And],  thei/ 
that  feed  [eat]   of  the  portion   of  his  meat  [dainty  food]  shall  destroy  [break] 

27  him,  and  his  army  [force]  shall  overflow;  and  many  shall  fall  down  slain.  And 
both  these  kings'hearts  [the  kings,  their  heart]  shall  be  to  do  mischief  [wrong], 
and  they  siiall  speak  lies  [falsehood]  at  [over]  one  table ;  but  it  shall  not  pros- 
per: for  yet  the  end  shall  he  at  [to]  the  time  appointed. 

2S  Then  [And]  shall  he  return  into  his  land  with  great  riches ;  and  his  heart 
shall  be  against  the  holy  covenant ;   and   he  shall  do   exploits  and  return  to  his 

29  own  land.     At  [To]  the  time  appointed  he  shall  return,  and  come  toward  [in] 

30  the  south  :  but  [and]  it  shall  not  be  as  the  former,  or  [and]  as  the  latter.  For 
[And]  the  ships  of  Chittini  shall  come  against  [in]  him ;  therefore  [and]  he  shall 
be  grieved  [dejected],  and  return,  and  have  indignation  against  the  holy  cove- 
nant ;  so  [and]  shall  he  do  ;  he  shall  even  [and  he  shall]  return,  and  have  intelli- 
gence witli  them  that  forsake  the  holy  covenant. 

31  And  arms  shall  stand  on  his  part  [from  him],  and  they  shall  pollute  the  sanc- 
tuary of  trength  [the  stronghold],  and  shall  take  [cause  to  turn]  aivaij  the 
daily  [continual]  sucrijice, -dud  they   shall   place   [give]   the  abomination  that 

32  maketh  desolate.  And  such  as  do  wickedly  af/ainst  [the  wicked  doers  of]  the 
covenant  shall  he  corrupt  [pollute]  by  flatteries:   but  [and]  the  people  that  do 

33  know  their  [its]  God  shall  be  strong^  and  do  e.qdoits.  And  i/iey  that  under- 
stand amomj  [the  prudent  of]  the  people  shall  instruct  [understand  for  the] 
many  ;  yet"  [and]   they  shall  fall    [be  stumbled]   by  the  sword,   and  by   flame, 

34  by  ca])tivity,  and  by  spoil,  many  days.  Now  [And]  when  they  shall  fall  [be 
stumbled],  they  shaU  be  holpen  [helped]  with  a  little  help  :  but  [and]  many 

35  shall  cleave  [be  joined]  to  them  with  flatteries.     And  some  of  them  of  under- 
■  standing  [the  prudent]  shall  fall  [be  stumbled],  to  try  [lit.,  smelt  in]  them,  and 

to  purge  [purify],  and  to  make  them  white,  even  to  [tdl]  the  time  of  the  end: 

36  because  it  is  yet  for  a  [to  the]  time  appointed.  And  the  king  shall  do  accord- 
ing to  his  will ;  and  he  shall  e.\alt  himself,  and  in.agnify  himself  above  every 
go"l,  and  shall  speak  marvellous  [distinguished]  thinr/s  against  tlie  God  of  gods, 
ami  shall  prosper  till  the  indignation  be  accomplished  [fail]  :  for  tlial  that  is 
determined  shall  be  done. 

37  Neither  shall  he  regard  [And  he  will  not  have  understanding  upon]  the  God  of 
his  fathers,  nor  [and  upon]  the  desire  of  women,  nor  regard  [and  he  will  not  have 

38  understandintt  upon]  any  god  :  for  he  shall  magnify  himself  above  all.  But  in  Ilis 
estate  [And  on  his  base,  i.e.,  stead]  shall  he  hoiwur  [give  glory  to]  the  god  of  forces 
[stroncrholds]  ;  and  [toj  a  god  whom  his  fathers  knew  not  shall  he  honour  [give 
glory]"with  gold,  and  [with]  silver,  and  with  precious  stones  [stone],  and  plea- 

39  sant  things.  Thus  [And]  shall  he  do  in  the  most  [forti-esses  of]  strongholds 
with  a  strange  god,  whom  he  shall  acknowledge  and  increase  [increase  to  ac- 
knowlediie]  ^citli  glory  :  and  he  shall  cause  them  to  rule  over  [the]  many,  and 
shall  divide  the  land  for  gain  [distribute  ground  with  a  price]. 

to  And  at  [in]  the  time  of  the  end  shall  the  king  of  the  soutli  push  at  [wage  war 
with]  him  :  and  the  king  of  the  north  shall  come  against  him  like  a  whirlwind 
[will  storm  upon  him],  with  chariots  [chariot],  and  with  horsemen  [horses],  and 
with  many  ships  [boats]  ;  and  he  sliall  enter  [come]  \\\to  tlie  countries  [lands], 

41   and  shall  overflow  and  pass  over.     He  shall  enter  also  [And  he  will  come]  iu^c 


238 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


the  glorious  land  [land  of  comeliness],  and  many  countries  shall  be  oveithrowii 
[stumbled]  :  but  [and]  these  shall  escape  out  of  his  hand,  even  Edoni,  and  Moab, 

42  and  the  chief  [first]  oi'  tlie  children  of  Ammon.  He  shall  stretch  foitli  his  haiul 
also  [And  he  shall  send  his  hand]  upon  [in]  the  countries  [lands]  ;   and  the  lan<l 

43  of  Egypt  sliall  not  escape  [be  for  an  escaped  one,  i.e.,  exempt].  But  [And]  he 
shall  have  ])o\ver  [rule]  over  the  treasures  of  gold  and  of  silver,  and  over  all  the 
precious  [pleasant]  tilings  of  Egypt :  and  the  Libyans  and  the  Ethiopians  shall 

44  be  at  [in]  iiis  steps.  But  [And]  tidings  out  of  the  east  and  out  of  the  north 
shall  trouble  him:  therefore  [and]  he  shall  go  forth  with  great  fury  to  destroy, 

45  and  utterly  to  make  away  [devote  to  extermination]  many.  And  he  shall 
plant  tlie  tabernacles  [tents]  of  his  palace  [pavilion]  between  the  seas  in  [at] 
the  glorious  holy  mountain  [holy  mountain  of  comeliness]  ;  yet  [and]  he  shall 
come  to  his  end,  and  none  shall  help  him. 

8 

LEXICAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL   NOTES. 

[1  U""l^^?3.  literally  equities^  hence  a  compact  as  to  what  is  agreed  upon  as  right  between  the  parties.  It  here  seems 
fo  refer  especially  to  the  terms  or  provisos  of  the  alliance,  the  marriage  being  one  of  the  main  conditions  or  considera- 
tions,— "^  The  pronoun  is  emphatic. — '  Q"i"nZ31  probably,  like  QTlCl?^  above,  contains  an  allusion  to  the  rights  of  a 
contract,  and  may  therefore  signify  allie8.'\ 


EXEGETICAL    REMARKS. 

Verse  2.  Touching  upon  the  last  kings  of  Per- 
sia in  a  hasty  and  summary  review.  And  now 
will  I  show  thee  the  truth.  tTSS,  see  chap.  x. 
21. — Behold,  there  shall  stand  up  yet  three 
kings  in  Persia;  i.e..  doubtless,  after  the  pre- 
sent king-,  hence  after  Cyrus  (see  chap.  x.  1), 
there  shall  be  three  more  Icings  of  Persia, — the 
Persian  state  shall  have  three  more  kings.  The 
author  therefore  assigns  altogether  four  kings 
to  Persia,  fi'om  which,  however,  it  by  no  means 
follows  that  he  '*  knew  "  only  that  number ;  nor 
can  it  be  shown  from  Ezra  iv.  5.  7  that  the 
writer  of  that  book  knew  of  four  Persian  kings 
(Hitzig,  Ewald).  *  The  number  four  is  rather  to 
be  regarded  as  a  symbolic  number,  exactly  like 
that  of  the  wings  and  heads  of  the  leopard  in 
chap.  vii.  G  (see  on  that  passage),  which  indi- 
cates that  the  development  of  the  kingdom  in 
question  is  completed,  and  is,  to  that  extent, 
parallel  with  the  number  of  the  world-monar- 
chies and  with  other  significant  quadruples  ;  cf. 
Eth.-fuud  principles,  etc.,  on  chap.  ii.  No.  3.f — 
And  the  fourth  shall  be  far  richer  than  they 
all  J  rather,  '•  shall  acquire  greater  riches,"  etc. 
This  fourth  one  does  not  denote  the  last  of  all 
the  Persian  kings,  Darius  Codomannus,  but  the 
fourth  from  the  beginning  (or,  in  other  words. 


*  ["Moreover,  this  assertion  (thut  the  O.  T.  only  knows 
of  four  Persian  king.-?)  is  not  at  all  correct ;  for  in  Neh.  .xii. 
22,  besides  those  four,  there  is  ment:on  made  also  of  a 
Darius,  and  to  the  Jews,  in  the  age  of  the  Maccabbees  there 
was  well  known,  according  to  1  Mace.  i.  1,  hIso  the  name  of 
the  Inst  Persian  king,  Diirius,  who  wad  put  to  death  (de- 
feated) by  Alcxuntler.'' — Keit.] 

t  [This  interpretation  is  altogether  vague  and  unneces- 
sary. The  mrjining  obvimrsly  is  not  that  there  should  there- 
after be  only  funr  more  Persian  kings  in  all,  but  merely  that 
the  next  three  should  bring  down  the  history  ns  far  as  the 
prophetic  vision  extended  in  this  regard,  i.e.,  down  to  the 
breaking  out  of  the  conflict  tjetween  Fertda  and  Greece. 
Thus  "the  three  kings  who  shall  yetClSy)  arise  are  the 
three  succe^'^irs  of  Cjtus  viz..  Canibyses,  the  pseudo-Smer- 
dis,  and  Darius  Hysta-spis :  the  fourth  is  then  Xerxes,  with 
whom  all  that  is  saiil  retrarding  the  fourth  perfectly  agrees. 
Thus  Havernick,  Ebrard,  Uelitasch,  Auberlen,  and  Kliefoth 
Interpret."— AVW.i 


the  third  of  the  three  just  mentioned),*  and 
therefore  Xerxes,  as  pseudo-Smerdis,  is  probably 
not  included,  and  Cyrus,  Cambyses,  and  Dariu.s 
Hystaspis  are  considered  the  first  three.     The 
characteristic  noticed  in  this  place  applies  well 
to  Xerxes,  as  he  became  especially  famous  be- 
cause of  his   immense  riches  (Herodotus,  III. 
96 ;  IT.  87-29),  and  as  his  expedition  into  Greece 
obscured  those  of  his  father  by  the  excessive 
greatness  of  his  armament.     The  significance  of 
this  fourth  member  of  the  old  Persian  dynasty 
(whose  identity  with  Xerxes  was  naturally  not 
.vet  apprehended  by  the  prophet  [?] .  especially 
as  the  angel  did  not  see  fit  to  state  his  name)  is 
th.at  he  represents,  on  the  one  hand,  the  acme 
of  the  development  in  power  of  the  kingdom  in 
question,  and,  on  the  other,  the  beginning  of  its 
dissolution. — And  by  his  strength  through  his 
riches,  or,  "when  he  has  become  strong  through 
his  riches,     ir.ptnr^,  an  infinitive  (cf.  2  Chron. 
xii.  1  ;  also  infra,  v.  4,  and  chap.  viii.  8,  23),  is 
not  co-ordinated  with  the  following  """f  72,  but 
is  placed  above  it. — He  shall  stir  up  all  against 
the  realm  of  Greecia,  i.e.,  "'stake  all."     jsn, 
properly,  "  the  all,"  i.e.,  all  that  has  been  men- 
tioned, all  the  immense  treasures  and  forSes  re- 
ferred to.     1''<^,  properly,   •■  shall  excite,  stir 
up,"  does  not  allude  so  much  to  inanimate  treas- 
ures as  to  the  subjects  of  this  king  as  Ijeing  the 
objects  of  his  exciting  activity ;   cf.  v.  25  ;  Job 
xli.  2;  Jer.  1.9.-1];  ri'l^r"?  tlN  is  not  properly 
"  against  the  realm   of  Javan,"   but  "  to  the 
realm,"  etc.  ;  PS  serves  to  introduce  the  accusa- 
tive denoting  the  direction  of  the  movement. — 
It  accords   fully  with  the  position  of  the  seer 
prior  to  Xerxes,  that  Greece  (with   regard   to 
Javan,    cf.  on  chap.    >'iii.   21)  should  be  repre- 
sented as  a  kingdom.     A  Maccaba^an  writer,  who 
might  aim  to  sketch  the  history  of  that  king, 
and  of  his  expedition  against  the  Greeks,  would 

*  [This  computation  is  manifestly  inconsistent,  for  it  con 
founds  the  "fourth"  with  the  one  juat  said  to  ue  the 
third.] 


CHAP.  XI.  2-45. 


239. 


assuredly  have  known,  and  indicated,  that  at 
that  time  Javan  was  not  yet  a  ri2;tt. 

Verses  3,  4.  Alexander  the  Great  eind  7(w  im- 
mediate successors.  *  And  a  mighty  king  shall 
stand  up.  "123  "j;",  a  herioc,  warlike  king ; 
cf.  "^Z'i  rs,  Isa.  ix.  5,  and  also  the  symbolic 
description  of  Alexander's  martial  greatness  in 
chap.  viii.  5  et  seq. ,  21.  """i  "  ^^  stands  up," 
i.  e. ,  comes  up  and  presents  a  warlike  and  threat- 
ening appearance  ;  cf.  vs.  4,  14,  and  also  v.  1. 
-  And  do  according  to  his  will.  Cf.  chap, 
viii.  4  and  infra,  v.  llj.  The  sovereign  arbitra- 
riness with  which  Alexander  ruled  all  the  [ler- 
sous  of  his  time  is  likewise  attested  by  Curtius, 
X.  5,  3.5 :  "  Fortnnam  solus  omnium  mortidium 
in potestate  !tabuit." — Verse  4,  And  when  he 
shall  stand  up  ( rather,  "when  he  has  stood 
up  "),  his  kingdom  shall  be  broken,  and  shall 
be  divided  toward  the  four  winds  of  heaven. 

IT???^  is  probably  to  be  closely  connected  with 
the  idea  presented  by  "i^J  in  the  preceding 
verse:  ^^ and  ichen"  or,  "and  as  soon  as  he 
shall  have  stood  up"  (Von  Lengerke,  Fiiller, 
etc.) ;  so  that  the  brief  duration  of  Alexander's 
reign  is  here  indicated.  Others,  e.g.,  Haver- 
nick.  Kranichfeld,  Ewald,  etc.,  render  it,  "and 
when  he  shaU  stand  in  his  power,  when  his 
power  has  reached  its  highe.st  point  "  (Luther) ; 
but  this  view  is  questionable,  because  of  the 
entirely  too  pregnant  meaning  which  is  thus 
attributed  to  -,-^-s.  Hitzig's  assertion  that  iq; 
in  this  place  is  synonymous  with  the  Syr.  t;-, 
"to  depart  in  death,  to  die,"  and  that  the  fol- 
lowing ^5".3fl  (with  which  cf.  chap.  viii.  8)  is 
not  pas.sive  in  its  signification,  and  therefore 
does  not  denote  "to  be  Iroken,"  but  "  to  break 
apart,"  must  certainly  be  rejected. — On  the 
phrase,  "  be  divided  toward  the  four  winds  of 
heaven."  cf.  the  analogous  symbolic  description 
in  chap.  viii.  8. — And  not  to  his  posterity, 
namely,  "shall  it  be  divided;"  they  shall  not 
be  benefited  by  the  division,  but  shall  be  en- 
tirely deprived  of  their  patrimony,  thus  realiz- 
ing a  feature  that  was  common  in  the  early 
experience  of  the  theocracy,  1  Sam.  xv.  28  ;  2 
Sam.  iii.  10  ;  1  Kings  xi.  11 ;  xiv.  7-10;  xv.  29  ; 
xvi.  3  et  seq.  ;  xxi.  21.  It  is  well  known  that 
this  actually  was  the  case  with  Alexander's  sons, 
Hercules  (whose  mother  was  Barsina.  and  who 
was  murdered  by  Polysperchon)  and  Alexander 
(a  Ulius  posthumus.  bom  of  Roxana.  and  likewise 
murdered).  Cf.  Diodorus,  XIX.  105;  XX.  28; 
Pausan.,  IX.  7;  Justin.,  XV.  2;  Appian,  Si/r., 
C.  51. — Nor  according  to  his  dominion  which 
he  ruled,  "  shall  the  divided  kingdom  be  ;  "  on 
the  contrary,  it  shall  present  a  painful  picture 
of  impotence ;  cf .  'HDZ  sii  in  the  parallel, 
chap.  viii.  22. — For  his  kingdom  shall  be 
plucked  up,  even  for  others  besides  those. 
S3!t  isb'?,  to  the  exclusion  of  those,  i.e.,  of 


•  [*■  From  the  conflict  of  Persia  with  Greece,  the  nngcl 
(ver.  3t  passes  immediutely  over  to  the  founder  of  the  Grje- 
'  cian  (Macedonian)  world-kingdom;  for  the  prophecy  pro- 
cetjds  not  to  the  prediction  of  historical  details,  but  men- 
tions only  the  elements  or  fact4jrs  which  constitute  the 
histtirical  development.  The  eviteditinn  of  Xer.ves  aeainst 
(ir(.ece  brings  to  the  foreground  the  world-histnrical  conflict 
between  Persia  and  Greece,  which  led  to  the  destruction  of 
the  Persian  kin.sdom  by  Alexander  the  Great." — JCeit.] 


I  the  natural  heirs  and  rightful  successors  of  this 
ruler.  Concerning  the  phrase,  "  to  be  torn  out, 
uprooted,"  cf.  on  chap.  iv.  12,  12;  also  Job  xiv. 
7  et  seq.  ;  Isa.  vi.  10,  etc. 

I  Verses  5,  6.  The  first  Seleucidee  and  Lagid<e. 
While  the  prophetic  description,  upon  the  whole, 
has  hitherto  confined  itselif  to  general  outlines 
and  has  not  materially  deviated  from  the  ordi 
nary  methods  of  prophecy,  it  begins  at  thL" 
point  to  assume  a  suspiciously  specific  character, 
which  arouses  the  thought  that  later  hands  may 

■  have  improved  on  the  prophecy  by  interpolating 
various  features  of  detaU.  The  fact  that  only 
the  two  states,  emanating  from  the  great  Graj 
cian  world-empire,  which  bordered  immediatelj 
on  the  "pleasant  land,"  are  more  carefully  fol. 
lowed  in  their  further  development,  is  not,  in- 
deed, enough  to  arouse  this  suspicion,  for  the 
other  kingdoms  of  the  Diadochi  might  have  been 
passed  over  as  too  unimportant  in  their  rela- 
tions with  the  theocracy.  It  was,  mtireover,  to 
be  expected  that  Israel  should  be  alternately 
oppressed  by  a  southern  and  a  northern  neigh- 
bor, in  view  of  the  similar  parts  taken  in  earlier 
prophecies  by  the  Assyrio-Babyloniau  north  on 
the  one  hand,  and  by  Egypt  in  the  south,  on  the 
other  (cf.,  e.g.,  Isa.  xxx.  ti;  xliii  (i ;  Jer.  iii.  12, 
18;  vi.  22;  xlvi.  20,  24;  Zeph.  ii.  l:', ;  Zech.  x. 
10,  11).  But  the  manner  in  which  the  transac- 
tions between  the  two  kingdoms,  whether  peace- 
ful or  hostile  in  their  character,  are  described 
with  regard  to  their  changeful  course,  is  too 
exact,  and  covers  too  extended  a  succession  of 
reigns  and  events,  to  find  even  a  remote  parallel 
in  any  other  part  of  the  prophetic  literature  of 
the  Old-Test,  canon.*  The  unique  character  of 
the  section  in  this  respect  was  recognized  at  an 
early  period,  and  has  been  made  use  of  by  the 
opponents  of  the  authenticity  and  genuine  pro- 
phetic dignity  of  the  book  [e.g..  early  by  Por- 
phyry), in  order  to  attack  its  character,  and  has 
also  been  employed  for  apologetic  purposes,  in 
order  to  demonstrate  the  inspired  character  of 
the  prophecy,  and  the  astonishing  exactness 
with  which  its  predictions  corresiwnded  with 
the  actual  development  of  the  dominion  of  the 
Seleucidse  and  the  Lagidai.  With  this  view  it 
is  employed  by  Luther  m  his  preface  to  Daniel 
and  in  his  exposition  of  chap.  xii.  (which  begins, 
according  to  his  opinion,  with  chap.  xi.  36  ; — 
see  vol.  41,  pp.  2.52  et  .seq.,  294  et  seq.);  by 
Venema,  Commentarius  nil  Daniilis  cap.  XI. 
5-XII.  3  (Leovard.,  1752) ;  by  Hengstenberg, 
Beitr.,  p.  173  et  seq.  ;  and.  generally,  by  a  ma- 
jority of  orthodox  expositors  in  ancient  and 
modern  times.  Cf.  especially  Ebrard,  Die  Of- 
fenb.   Joh.,  p.   81   et  seq.,  where   a  thorough 


*  [Ab  we  have  already  remarked,  this  peculiarity  of  detai] 
does  not  argue  a  want  of  genuineness  here.  It  is  impossible 
to  sever  this  portion  from  the  preceding  and  following  pre- 
dictions, which  present  no  such  "'  suspicion*  '^  features, 
without  making  an  irreparable  hiatus  in  the  prophecy  as  a 
whole.  Indeed  this  very  p-irt  constitutes  the  gist  of  the 
entire  disclosure,  for  it  is  this  alone  that  iuiniediatey  and 
intimately  concerns  the  theocracy.  The  unprecedented  and 
unparalleled  character  of  the  Antiochian  persecution,  as  a 
chapter  in  .lewnsh  history,  ju-stifies  the  minuteness  and  ear- 
nestness of  the  portraiture.  The  rest  of  this  prophecy 
is  but  introduction  and  -sequel  to  this  centr.d  delineation. 
The  careful  reader  will  note  that  Daniel  does  not  give  a 
syllabus  of  secular  history,  but  only  sketches  the  course  ol 
those  collisions  which  should  affet%  the  retighntit  status  end 
relations  of  Israel  The  character  and  conduct  of  th€ 
Antiochian  antichrist  could  not  be  fully  appreciated  wltl> 
out  a  setting  forth  of  these  connections.] 


240 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


illustration  of  the  harmony  between  the  contents 
of  this  section  and  the  facts  of  history  precedes 
the  remark  :  "  For  that  very  reason — this  is  the 
internal  design  of  the  specializing-  prophecy, 
chap.  sd.  — the  coming  of  the  Macedonian  tyrant 
is  connected  with  the  age  of  Daniel  by  an  un- 
broken chain  of  the  most  particular  events,  that 
it  might  be  thoroughly  apparent  that  no  interval 
for  tlie  coming  of  the  Messiah  and  his  rejection 
sJiould  intervene  between  the  time  of  Daniel  and 
that  tyrant."  But  Ebrard  himself  does  not  seem 
to  have  remained  permanently  satisfied  with  this 
mode  of  justifying  the  remarkably  specific  char- 
acter of  the  prophecy  on  the  supposition  of  a 
higher  plane  of  revelation  ;  for,  in  his  review  of 
Fuller's  commentary,  he  confesses  that  he  "  has 
not  yet  found  any  exposition  of  chap.  xi.  that 
was  entirely  satisfactory  "  (p.  387). — We  shall  at- 
tend specially  to  Kranichf eld's  view  in  the  fol- 
lowing exposition  of  the  several  passages.  He 
likewise  contends  for  the  genuine  character  of 
the  section  throughout,  but  on  the  frequently 
forced  assumption  that  the  modem  exegesis  ap- 
plies what  was  indefinite  and  merely  ideal  in  the 
mind  of  the  prophet  to  the  facts  of  history  in 
the  corresponding  period  in  far  too  pointed  a 
manner. — And  the  king  of  the  south  shall  be 
(or  "become")  strong,  ie.,  the  ruler  to  whom 
the  south,  or  Egypt,  has  fallen ;  cf.  v.  8,  where 
the  south  is  expressly  designated  as  3'^"i?'3  ;  also 
the  Sept.  on  this  passage,  and  Zech.  vi.  6.  — And 
one  of  his  princes ;  and  he  shEtll  be  strong 
above  him  ;  rather.  "  but  one  of  his  princes — 
he  shall  be  strong  above  him. "  With  regard  to 
the  partitive  T?  in  'i''^^  X^'^,  cf.  Gen.  xxviii. 
11;  Ex.  vi.  36;  Neh.  xiil  28.  The  subject, 
"  one  of  his  princes,"  occupies  a  detached  posi- 
tion at  the  beginning  (cf.  Ezek.  xxxiv.  19) ;  the 
copvila,  however,  restores  the  connei;tion  :  "  (so 
far  as  he  is  concerned)  he  shall  still  be  stronger." 
— Others  (Luther,  etc.,  Bertholdt,  Rosenm., 
Kranichfeld,  Fiiller,  etc.)  regard  the  t  in  T31 
T^"'^e;  as  the  definite  "  and  indeed,  namely,"  and 
refer  the  suffix  to  the  subject  of  the  preceding 
verse :  '  •  and  the  king  of  the  south,  namely  one 
of  his  (Alexander's)  princes,  shall  become  strong." 
This,  however,  is  opposed  by  the  lack  of  a  de- 
finite subject  of  P!n'!]1  in  that  case,  and  by  the 
jinanimous  authority  of  the  ancient  versions, 
which  regard  this  second  BTn^t  as  the  predicate 
of  i-ni:;  -^lan,  despite  the  ^C/wMcA.  Consequently, 
the  event  to  which  the  passage  alludes  is  the 
founding  of  the  dynasty  of  the  SeleucidiE  in  the 
year  B.C.  312,  by  Seleucus  Nicator,  the  general 
of  Ptolemy  Lagus  (Diodorus,  XIX.  55,  58; 
Appian,  Syr.,  C.  52),*  who  extended  his  domin- 
ion from  Phrygia  to  the  Indus,  and  thus  greatly 
exceeded  his  former  lord  in  power,  approaching 
to  tlie  position  of  power  and  greatness  occupied 
by  Alexander  himself  more  nearly  than  any 
other  of  the  Diadochi  (Appian,  Si/r.,  55  ;  Arrian, 
Annb..\ll.  22.  ft).— And  (shall)  have  domin- 
ion ;  his  dominion  shall  be  a  great  dominion. 
-1  i'^r*??  is  the  predicate,  followed  by  the  sub- 


*  [Keil  lays  ^eut  Btresa  upon  the  objection  that  Seleucua 
was  tint  one  of  l'tolem>'a  generals,  as  the  text  requires  ;  but 
hi?  own  account  of  the  history  malces  him  out  to  have  been 
to  at  IcuBt  for  a  tiine.J 


ject -in  regular  order.  The  whole  clause,  how- 
ever, is  logically  subordinated  to  i'f  ^1  ;  of. 
Gen.  xil  8. — Verse  6.  And  in  the  end  of  year! 
they  shall  jo  n  themselves  together.  7pil 
C"^ri\  "  and  after  the  lapse  of  several  years, "  cf. 
2  Chron.  xviii.  3  ;  also  infra,  vs.  8  and  13.  The 
subjects  of  the  sentence  are  the  kings  of  the 
northern  and  of  the  southern  kingdoms,  and  the 
alliance  referred  to  is  the  marriage  of  Antiochus 
II.  Theos  (the  son  and  successor  of  Antiochus 
I.  Soter,  who  had  followed  Seleucus  Nicator 
upon  the  throne  of  the  Seleucidae  as  its  second 
possessor,  B.C.  281-2G1,  but  who  is  wholly  un- 
noticed in  this  prophecy)  with  Berenice,  the 
daughter  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  (280-247), 
the  second  of  the  line  of  Ptolemies.  Antiochus 
was  obliged,  on  that  occasion,  to  banish  Loadice, 
his»former  wife  and  half-sister,  and  to  disinherit 
the  children  she  had  borne  to  him  (Appian,  Syr., 
C.  55  ;  cf.  Jerome  on  this  passage).  It  is  im- 
possible to  doubt  that  this  event  is  refeiTed  to 
in  this  place,  in  view  of  what  follows,  and  Kran- 
ichfeld therefore  wastes  his  labor  when  he  ob- 
serves, with  reference  to  Tlt2n  I?'?,  and  with 
an  apologetic  aim,  that  "it  is  an  interpolation 
to  assume  that  Daniel  here  intended  precisely  a 
king  of  Syria." — To  make  an  agreement ;  pro- 
perly, "  to  make  a  straightening,  to  establish  a 
just  and  peaceful  condition."  Cf.  DT}S"],  v.  17, 
and  the  corresponding  iiKaia,  1  Mace.  vii.  12. — 
But  she  shall  not  retain  the  power  of  the  arm  ; 
neither  shall  he  stand,  nor  his  arm  ;  i.e.,  pro- 
bably, neither  her  arm  nor  his,  which  had 
strengthened  themselves  by  that  union,  shall  be 
able  to  retain  the  power  thus  acquired  ;  *  their 
union  shall  again  be  dissolved,  and  the  political 
alliance,  with  its  strengthening  influence  upon 
both  kingdoms,  shall  thus  be  set  aside.  It 
seems  unnecessary,  upon  this  view,  to  adopt 
Hitzig's  emendation,  1>'"1!  ^1'??'^  ^<b1  ("  his 
[i.  e. ,  the  arm  of  Berenice]  arms  shall  not  stand," 
which  is  held  to  be  equivalent  to  "  her  father  as 
well  as  her  consort,  who  were  hitherto  her  pro- 
tectors, shall  forsake  her),  and  also  Kranichfeld's 
rendering  of  511^  j  in  the  sense  of  hont,  in  sup- 
port of  which  vs.  15.  23,  and  .31  may  indeed  be 
adduced,  but  this  is  decidedly  opposed  by  the 
context,  which  treats  solely  of  an  intermarriage 
and  its  immediate  consequences,  and  not  at  all 
of  warlike  events.  It  is  likewise  arbitrary  to 
take  >T^T  in  the  sense  of  "  support,  protector," 
with  Hiivemick,  Von  Lengerke,  etc. ,  and  ac- 
cordingly to  find  the  assistance  to  be  derived  by 
Berenice  from  Egypt  referred  to  in  the  former 
half  of  the  sentence,  and  in  the  latter  half  the 


*  [This  substantially  atrrees  with  the  rendering  nf  Keil, 
who,  however,  is  rather  refined  in  his  view  of  the  con- 
struction:  "The  subject  to  ~?:T"l  J<b  is  the  13:  T^Ti; 
and  his,  i.e.,  this  king's  help  is  his  own  daughter,  who 
should  establish  D^1X*'*3   by  her  marriage  with  the  king 

of  the  north.      1T*1T^   is  a  second  subject  subordinated  or 

co-ordinated  to  the  subject  lying  in  the  verb  :  he  tngelher 
with  htn  help.  We  may  not  explain  tlie  passage  :  neither  f-e 
nor  his  help,  because  in  this  case  i<^n  could  not  be  want 
ihg,  particularly  in  comparison  with  the  following  K*n."] 


CHAP.  XI.  3-45. 


241 


aid  rendered  to  her  husband  by  Berenice  herself. 
■'Arm"  is  intended  in  each  case  to  simply  de- 
note the  physical  or  political  power  of  the  respec- 
tive ro\  ai  personages,  and  consequently,  in  the 
first  instance,  that  of  the  Egyptian  princess,  and 
in  the  next  that  of  her  consort. — But  she  shall 
be  giveu  up  and  they  that  brought  her,  and 
he  that  begat  her,  and  he  that  strengthened 
her  in  these  times  ;  or,  "he  that  begat  her  and 
he  that  led  her  away  in  the  times."  \'^^^?'r' 
'•they  that  brought  her,"  denotes  either  the 
"  begetter  "  who  is  mentioned  immediately  after- 
ward, and  the  one  that  "led  her  home,"  hence 
her  father  and  her  husband  (Havernick,  Fuller, 
etc. ),  or  the  company  of  her  followers,  her  train 
when  she  left  Egypt  (Ewald),  [or  "  who  brought 
her  into  the  marriage"  (Keil)).  The  word  is 
hardly  to  be  taken,  with  Hitzig,  as  a  categorical 
plural,  and  thus  to  be  limited  to  the  husband. 
op'n!^  properly  signifies  "he  that  holds  her, 
that  obtains  possession  of  her,"  i.e.,  her  consort 
(thus  correctly  Vou  Leugerke  and  Hiivemick, 
while  Hitzig,  Kranichfeld,  [Keil],  etc  ,  contend 
tor  the  rendering  of  P''ynC  hy  "  maintaining  or 
supporting,"  which  is  too  artificial).— niri"3i 
'■  in  tie  times,"  is  an  idiom  signifying  "  at  that 
time,"  i.e.,  when  his  critical  situation  obliged 
hira  to  marry  her.  lC]"i  "she  shall  be  given 
up,  be  given  over  to  ruin,  overthrown  (in  perni- 
ciem  traditiir)"  is  a  very  general  expression  that 
does  not  necessarily  imply  death  by  violence ; 
cf.  I.sa.  V.  12;  also  infra,  v.  11. — The  historical 
commentary  on  the  latter  half  of  this  verse  is  as 
follows :  As  soon  as  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  had 
died  in  B.C.  247,  Antiochus  Theos  expelled 
Berenice,  and  recalled  the  formerly  rejected 
Laodice.  The  latter,  however,  aimed  at  farther 
revenge,  and  to  achieve  it  she  poisoned  the 
king,  had  her  son  by  him,  Seleucus  II.  Callini- 
cus,  declared  his  succes.sor,  and  sent  assassins 
against  Berenice,  who  had  fled  to  the  sanctuary 
of  Daphne.  The  latter  queen  was  slain,  toge- 
ther with  her  little  son,  and  the  hope  of  the 
Ptolemies  to  behold  one  of  their  lineage  on  the 
throne  of  the  Seleucidfe  was  thus  wholly  de- 
stroyed. Cf.  Polyajn.,  VIII.  50  ;  Ju.stin. ,  XXVII. 
1  ;  Appian,  1.  c. — Kranichfeld  vainly  attempts 
to  shake  the  erident  correspondence  of  this 
series  of  facts  with  the  language  of  the  passage 
by  regarding  ir^P  as  denoting  a  violent  death, 
and  consequently  as  not  harmonizing  with  the 
natural  death  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.*  He 
farther  translates  ?''"'!  in  the  sen.se  of  "  host," 
and  attributes  to  n^K^zn  the  questionable 
meaning,  "the  promotem  of  her  marrriage" 
(the  "  furtherers  of  the  whole  Delilah-like 
match"),  by  all  of  which  he  obviously  becomes 
liable  to  the  chiurge  of  arbitrary  ' '  interpola- 
tion," to  a  far  greater  degree  than  the  opponents 

*  [Keil  somewhat  extends  this  objection  :  *'  The  prophecy 
differs  from  the  lubtoricil  facts,  not  merely  in  regard  to  the 
consequences  of  the  events,  but  also  in  reir.ird  to  the  matter 
it-^elf ;  for  it  speaks  not  only  of  the  dau^rhter  but  also  of  her 
father,  being  given  up  to  death,  while  the  natural  death  of 
her  father  is  in  no  way  connected  with  that  marriage,  and 
not  till  aft€r  his  death  did  the  consecinences  fatal  to  his 
daughter  and  her  chilti  develop  themselves."  Such  niceties 
Df  verifieation  ni  a  prophecy  so  conci.se  and  incidental  we 
may  sately  leave  to  the  candor  of  the  reader.] 

16 


whom  he  accuses  of  that  crime  because  they 
frankly  recognize  the  reference  to  those  events. 

Verses  7-9.  PMemy  Erergetes  and  Seleiicuf 
Callinicu-s.  But  out  of  a  branch  of  her  roots 
shall  one  stand  up  in  his  place  (marg.).  The 
partitive  Tp,  as  in  v.  5.  '^  1?.:.,  "the  sprout- 
ing of  her  roots "  (cf .  Isa.  xi.  1 )  signifies  the 
lineage,  the  immediate  ancestry  of  Berenice ; 
the  person  referred  to  was  consequently  the  son 
of  her  parents  and  her  own  brother,  viz.  :  Ptol- 
emy III.  Evergetes,  the  successor  of  Ptolemy 
PhQadelphus,  B.C.  247-221.  i:2,  an  accusa- 
tive of  the  direction  (cf.  v.  2.  at  the  end)  ;  in 
vs.  20,  21,  it  is  replaced  by  a  definite  ii3  b?. — 
Which  (or  "and  he")  shall  come  with  an 
(rather,  "  against  the  ')  army,  and  shall  enter 
into  the  fortress  of  the  king  of  the  north 
S*:"'!  3"'n"jH  signifies  neither,  "he  shall  come 
to  his  host"  (Hitzig),  nor  "he  shall  come  to 
power  "  (Hiivemick) ;  the  former  rendering  is  as 
forced  as  the  latter  is  contrarj  to  the  language 
(owing  to  the  missing  article),  'jj;  is  rather 
equivalent  to  against,  and  the  "  host  "  is  that  of 
the  northern  king.  The  "  coming  into  his  for- 
tress "  which  follows,  designates  the  result  of 
the  expedition  as  a  whole,  the  taking  of  the 
northern  king's  fortress  by  the  king  of  the  south. 
It  must,  however,  remain  undecided  whether 
this  "  fortress  "  denotes  specially  the  strongly  for- 
tified maritime  city  of  Seleucia  (as  Hitzig  thinks) . 
It  is  more  probable  that  '1>"'2  is  used  collec- 
tively (cf.  V.  19),  and  that  therefore  2  8<^a  does 
not  denote  the  eutering  into  the  fortresses,  but 
only  the  arrival  before  them. — And  shall  deal 
(or  ••  execute  it")  against  them  and  prevail. 
"  Again.st  them"  refers  to  the  subjects  of 
the  northern  kingdom,  not  to  the  fortresses. 
With  regard  to  ?  "r^i  "*o  "^o  t°i  °'  against 
one,"  namely,  according  to  pleasure,  cf.  Jer. 
xviii.  2tj  ;  also  the  more  definite  in^l?  ^~,^,^ 
vs.  3,  30  ;  chap.  viii.  4.  Concerning  the  mag- 
nificent success  achieved  by  Ptolemj'  Evergetes 
during  his  expedition  against  Syria  (the  conquest 
of  almost  the  entire  Syrian  realm  from  Cilicia 
to  beyond  the  Tigris,  the  taking  of  numerous 
fortresses,  and  the  slaying  of  Laodice,  the  rival 
and  murderess  of  his  sister  Berenice)  cf.  Appian, 
Syr. ,  C.  ti5  ;  Justin. ,  XXVII.  1  ;  Jerome  on  the 
passage. — Verse  8.  And  shall  also  carry  cap- 
tive into  Egypt  their  gods,  with  their  princes 
(rather  "  molten  images  "),  etc.  The  suffix  in 
an'^nis  and  also  in  a,'l"'50:  refers  to  the  inhab- 
itants of  Syria,  the  same  to  whom  Sn2  in  the 
preceding  verse  referred.  D"^???  does  not  edg- 
nify  •'  princes"  in  this  passage  (as  it  does,  e.g., 
in  Josh.  xiii.  21  ;  Ezek.  xxxii.  30),  but  "  molten 
images,  cast  images,  brazen  statues ; "  and  con- 
sequently T'?-  is  employed  in  the  sense  which 
is  more  generally  denoted  by  '^c:  (Isa.  xli.  29  ; 
xlviii  5)  or  H^D^  (Ex.  xxxiL   4,  8;  xxxiv.  17, 

etc.).  The  express  mention  of  the  molten 
images  besides  the  gods  arises  from  the  fact  that 
the  existence  of  the  latter  is  made  wholly  de- 
pendent on  the  former.     The  transportation  of 


242 


THE  PEOPHET  DANIEL. 


the  idols  in  itself  is  the  significant  evidence  of 
the  total  subjugation  of  an  opposing  kingdom 
.'cf.  Isa.  xlvi.  1.  2  :  Jer.  xlviii.  7  ;  xlix.  3  ;  Hos. 
X.  5etseq. );  and  likewise  the  removal  of  the 
' '  precious  vessels  of  silver  and  gold  "  which  is 
afterward  noticed  ("11  ^"?,  genit.  materia, 
depending  on  the  immediately  preceding  gen. 
gaaUtdtis,  or^-in  -^Js),  cf.  Nah.  ii.  10;  Jer. 
xxvii  18  et  seq.  ;  Ezek.  viL  19  et  seq. ;  Zeph.  i. 
18  ;  Dan.  i.  2. — The  historical  event  which  cor- 
responds to  this  was  the  return  of  Ptolemy 
Evergetes  to  Egypt,  occasioned  by  a  revolt,  when 
he  carried  away  from  Syria  a  booty  of  4,000 
talents  of  gold,  numerous  jewels,  and  2,500 
idol-statues,  the  latter  including  among  their 
number  those  which  Cambyses  had  formerly 
transported  to  Persia.  It  was  the  restoration 
of  these  that  secured  to  this  third  Ptolemy  the 
name  of  Evtfjyerr/^.  Cf.  Jerome  on  the  passage, 
and  the  Marmm'  AduUtanum,  the  monument 
erected  by  the  victor  in  commemoration  of  his 
deeds,  which  boasts  that  he  had  united  Meso- 
potamia, Babylonia,  Persia,  Susiana,  Media,  and 
all  the  countries  as  far  as  Bactria,  under  his 
Bceptre.  In  Wew  of  this  exact  correspondence 
of  our  passage  to  the  facts  of  history,  which,  it 
IS  alleged,  occuiTed  subsequently  to  the  compo- 
iition  of  the  prophecy,  the  suspicion  that  the 
oracle  was  conformed  to  the  history  appears  to 
be  only  too  well  founded,  especially  as  Egypt 
^^'I'r-??)  is  expressly  mentioned  as  the  goal  of 
the  magnificent  triumphal  march.*  The  pre- 
dictions by  other  prophets  relating  to  expedi- 
tions that  secured  great  booty  and  that  captured 
immense  numbers  of  idol-images,  e.g.,  those  of 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Nahum,  Ezekiel,  etc.,  in  the 
passages  cited  above,  are  always  associated  with 
very  different  surroundings,  and  present  fewer 
circumstances  of  detail  to  be  particularly  ful- 
filled, f  For  this  reason  it  cannot  be  admitted 
that  the  neglect  to  mention  the  death  of  Laodice 
forms  a  proof  of  the  undimmed  originality  of 
the  prophecy  (against  Kranichfeld). — And  he 
shall  continue  more  years  than  the  king  of 
the  north  ;  rather,  "  and  shall  abstain  from  the 
king  of  the  north  (several)  years."  i.e.,  shall 
refrain  from  waging  war  against  him,  shall  leave 
him  in  peace.  Thus  Hiivemick,  Von  Lengerke, 
Maurer,  Hitzig,  etc. ,  correctly  render  the  sense. 
On  the  other  hand,  Syr.,  Vulg.,  Luther,  Kran- 
ichfeld, Fuller,  etc.,  render  :  "  and  for  years  he 
bhall  maintain  himself  before  the  king  of  the 
north,"  i.e.,  preserve  his  superiority  over  him, 
firi.vealebit  adcci-sus  regem  Aqvilonis  (Vulg.). 
This  interpretation  is  opposed  by  the  usage  of 
Tp  ~0J  in  the  sense  of  "  to  cease,  abstain  from 
something,"  which  occurs  elsewhere  also ;  cf. 
Gen.  xxix.  35  ;  xxx.  9 ;  2  Kings  iv.  6  ;  xiii.  18.  X — 

*  [Surely  the  exact  agreement  of  prophecy  with  hiptory 
ought  not  to  be  an  objection  with  any  except  those  who 
deny  the  possildlity  of  predit'tion  at  all.  At  other  times  the 
lack  (li  this  ygreeraent  is  made  by  the  author  the  ground  of 
the  same  objection.] 

t  [This  argument  resolves  itself  simply  into  the  conceded 
fact  that  the  pr-iphccy  in  question  is  unusually  specific. 
But  what  of  that?  Was  not  the  Spirit  of  revelation  com- 
petent to  impart  particulars,  if  need  be*  The  author's 
reasoning  is  purely  of  a  piece  \vith  the  prefiumpUuim  of 
rationalism.] 

X  [Keil  likewise,  though  he  admits  that  *^?D  TD?"' 
might  well  bear  the  sense  'A  abstainijig  from,  yet  adduces 


Verse  9.  So  the  king  of  the  south  shall  com« 
into  his  kingdom  ;  rather,  "  and  he  shall  (now| 
come  into  the  kingdom  of  the  king  of  the  .south." 
The  subject  obviously  is  the  northern  king,  who 
was  mentioned  at  the  close  of  the  preceding 
verse,  for  -?i'j  "j??  is  clearly  a  genitive  depend- 
ing on  r^rb^  (against  Kranichfeld). — And  shall 
return  unto  his  oi«m  land,  i.e.,  to  the  northern 
kingdom,  to  Syria.  The  reference  to  the  expe- 
dition against  Egypt  by  sea  (with  a  fleet  that 
was  soon  destroyed  in  a  storm)  and  also  by  land, 
which  Seleucus  Callinicus  undertook  about  B.  C. 
240,  or  two  years  after  the  departure  of  Ptolemy 
Evergetes  from  Syria,  but  which  resulted  in  his 
total  defeat  and  hasty  flight,  is  sufficiently 
obvious;  cf.  Euseb.,  Chron.,  I.  ijntG ;  Justin., 
XXVII.  2. 

Verses  10-12.  Seleucus  Ceraumis  and Antiochus 
the  Great  agaiimt  Ptolemy  IV.  Philoputer.  But 
his  sons  shall  be  stirred  up  (or  " prepare  for 
war")  and  shall  assemble  a  multitude  of  great 
forces.  If  the  Keri  "1^;^^  is  to  be  followed,  it 
is  unquestionable  that  the  suffix  of  this  plural 
refers  back  to  the  last  named  Syrian  king  Seleu- 
cus II.  Callinicus,  and  that  his  two  sons.  Seleu- 
cus III.  Ceraunus  (B.C.  227-224)  and  Antiochus 
III.  the  Great  (224-187),  are  intended.  It  ia 
reported  concerning  the  latter,  although  only  by 
the  somewhat  credulous  and  hasty  Jerome  (on 
the  passage),  that,  in  connection  with  his  younger 
brother,  Antiochus.  he  made  war  on  Egjpt ;  but 
it  is  hardly  possible  that  be  should  have  at- 
tempted a  war  against  Ptolemy  Evergetes,  who 
lived  and  reigned  until  B.C.  221,  three  years 
beyond  the  reign  of  Ceraunus.  But  the  writer 
does  not  probably  intend  to  assert  by  ""?""]  that 
the  warlike  expedition  undertaken  by  the  bro- 
thers was  primarily  and  directly  aimed  against 
Egypt.  The  verb  is  rather  used  in  a  compre- 
hensive sense,  so  as  to  cover  the  campaign  of 
Seleucus  Ceraunus  (in  which  he  met  his  death, 
B.C.  224)  against  Attains  of  Pergamus.  and  also 
that  commenced  several  years  afterward  by 
Antiochus  Magnus,  which  was  directed  against 
the  indolent  Ptolemy  IV.  PhOopater  of  Egypt ; 
cf.  Polyb.,  IV.  48  ;  Appian.  Syr..  C.  06  (Haver- 
nick,  Von  Lennerke,  Maurer,  Hitzig.  FiiUer, 
etc.,  are  substantially  correct).  This  counter- 
acts the  attempt  of  Venema,  Bertholdt,  and 
Kranichfeld  to  read  T.^'^  with  the  Kethib,  and 
to  understand  Ptolemy  Phdopater,  the  son  of 
Evergetes,  by  this  "son."  liy  proving  it  to  be 
superfluous,  and,  moreover,  to  be  conflicting 
with  the  plural  1C?!*1  l^ir"'..  *  —  And  (one) 
shall    certainly    come,    oveiflow,   and    pass 


plausible  rea.sons  from  I  he  context  in  favor  of  the  sense  to 
nuind  before.  It  is  difficult,  however,  to  see  how  this  sig- 
nification can  be  legitimately  extracted  from  the  words.] 

*  [The  author's  remarks  sufficientl}'  meet  the  objection  of 
Keil  that  "  the  announcement  of  the  war  of  his  (Callini'-ns") 
sons  with  many  hosts  overflowing  the  land  is  not  confirmed 
by  history ; "  but  to  make  all  clear  we  add  the  followinii 
from  Stuart  :  *'  The  sons  of  Seleucus  Callinicus  were  Seleu- 
cus Ceraunus  and  Antiochus  Magnus.  The  former  of  these 
two  began  the  war  against  Egyiit,  in  .\sia  Minor,  where 
Egj-pt  had  tributary  or  allied  provinces.  He  perished  iu 
the  contest  there.  Antiochus  Magnus  then  led  on  his  army 
toward  Egypt ;  and  hence  SflS  St-^  in  the  singular.     Th« 

infin.  being  after  the  definite  verb  denotes  the  continued 
advance  of  the  army  under  Antiochus.'"] 


CHAP.  XI.  3^5. 


243 


through  (or  "inundate  ")•  ^^^^  S*?^,  a  strong 
description  of  the  protracted  but  irresistible 
advance,  followed  by  a  portrayal  of  the  over- 
flowing masses  of  warriors  that  recalls  the  simi- 
lar description  in  Isa.  viii.  8.  Begiuning  with 
this  point,  the  subject  is  singular,  denoting 
Antiochus  the  Great  alone,  who  became  king  of 
Syria  after  the  death  of  his  brother  Seleucus 
III.,  and  after  that  of  Ptolemy  Evergetes  became 
the  terrible  and  victorious  foe  of  Egypt,  whose 
luxurious  and  cowardly  king,  Ptolemy  Philo- 
pater,  quietly  permitted  him  to  take  the  fortress 
of  Seleucia  on  the  Orontes,  to  capture  Tyre  and 
Ptolemais  through  the  treachery  of  Theodotus, 
and  finally  to  besiege  the  fortress  of  Dora  during 
a  protracted  period,  while  entering  into  a  four 
months'  truce  with  him  in  connection  with  that 
siege  (Polyb. ,  V.  45-06). — Then  shall  he  return, 
and  be  stirred  up  (or,  "  and  they  wage  war  "), 
even  to  his  fortress.  ICi  can  in  no  case  de- 
signate the  return  of  Antiochus  to  Seleucia  on 
the  Orontes,  after  concluding  the  truce  above 
referred  to,  in  order  to  go  into  winter  quarters 
at  that  place  (Polyb.,  V.  06),  but  rather,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  verb.  beUicum  ^^3~"1  (as  it  must 
be  read  with  the  Kethib,  instead  of  •"'"'.^r"^,  as 
the  Keri  prefers)  which  immediately  follows,  it 
denotes  a  renewal  of  his  operations  against  the 
Egyptians  in  the  spring  of  218.  in  the  course  of 
which  he  surrounded  the  Egyptians  in  the  strong 
city  of  Sidon,  to  which  they  had  advanced,  con- 
quered all  Phoenicia  and  Palestine,  and  finally 
established  himself  in  Gaza  (Polyb.,  V.  68-80). 
"'"Q  (as  it  should  be  read,  or  even  "ll?-?,  with 
the  Keri,  but  not  n^')a,  as  KranichfeW  desires), 
"  his  fortress,"  doubtless  refers  to  the  great  and 
exceedingly  strong  city  of  Gaza,  so  that  its  suf- 
fix points  back  to  the  king  of  the  north,  the 
subject  of  :*J'^.  It  is  arbitrary,  however,  to 
assume  a  designed  assimilation  in  sound  be- 
tween rA~'0  and  ~?",  as  do  Vuuema  and  Hitzig. 
— Verse  1 1 .  And  the  king  of  the  south  shall  be 
moved  with  choler,  etc.  On  ~tt"iQr";T  of. 
chap.  viii.  7.  The  king  of  the  south  who  is 
"moved  with  choler"  is  Ptolemy  Philopater, 
and  his  "coming  forth,"  as  here  described, 
denotes  his  moving  to  attack  Antiochus  the 
Great  in  the  year  217,  with  70,000  foot,  5,000 
horse,  and  73  elephimts  (Polyb..  V.  79). — And 
he  shall  set  forth  a  great  multitude ;  but 
(rather,  "  and  ")  the  multitude  shall  be  given 
into  his  hand.  The  southern  king  is  the  sub- 
ject here  likewise,  whose  success,  as  based  on 
the  support  of  a  great  array,  is  described  in  this 
and  the  following  verse  (not  the  king  of  the 
north,  as  Ki'anichfeld  supposes).  -"  VS:n  de- 
eign,ates  the  great  host  before  described,  at 
whose  head  the  aroused  Egyptian  king  goes 
forth,  and  11>3~'T  the  host,  of  nearly  equal 
strength  (62.000  foot.  6,000  horse,  and  103  ele- 
phants) with  which  the  Syrian  opposed  him, 
Hitzig  arbitrarily  assumes  that  instead  of  "'^_ 
we  should  read  p:"!  ;  so  that  the  sense  would 
be,  "and  he  (Ptolemy  Philopater)  gave  the 
great  multitude  into  his  own  hand." — Verse  12. 


[  And  Tvhen  he  hath  taken  away  the  multitude, 

1  his  heart  shall  be  lifted  up  ;  rather,  '  and  the 
multitude  shall  rise  up  i  or  "  lift  itself  up  "),  and 
his  courage  (or  "  heart  ")  mcrease."  The  ' '  mul- 
titude "  denotes  the  powerful  host  of  the  Egyp- 

'  tians  (-.:=  -'5  ITS"'  '^-  ^1)  which  is  now  advanc- 
ing;  *  "his  courage"  0-r\)  is  the  courage  cf 
the  hitherto  cowardly,  dissipated,  and  lustful 
Ptolemy  Philopater  (cf.  2  Kings  xiv,  10).  The 
Kethib  C'"'^  is  probably  to  be  retained,  instead 
of  replacing  it  by  the  Keri  C"!"!,  which  is  simply 
an  easier  reading,  "rrl  is  spoken  of  a  warlike 
"rising  up"  to  battle,  as  in  Isa.  xxxiii.  10, — 
And  he  shall  cast  down  ten  thousands  ("  my- 
riads ").  This  occun'ed  near  Raphia  (southwest 
of  Gaza),  where  Ptolemy  Philopater  inflicted  a 
heavy  defeat  on  Antiochus  the  Great,  in  which 

,  the  Sj-rians  lost  in  killed  10,000  foot,  :!00  horse, 
and  five  elephants,  and  more  than  4,  OHO  prison- 
ers (Polyb.,  V,  80). — But  he  shall  not  be 
strengthened  by  it;  or,  "but  yet  he  shall 
not  become  strong,"  i.e.,  inasmuch  as  he  fol- 
lowed up  his  victory  very  negligently  (see  Jus- 
tin,, XXX.  1  :  "  Sj.oliassct  rigaii  Anti<c7ntm,  si 
fortiiiiiim  rirtute  juvhset  ;  "  cf.  Polyb.,  V.  87), 
and  immediately  returned  to  Egypt  after  gar- 
risoning the  cities  that  had  formerly  Ijeen  lost, 
in  order  to  resume  his  former  dissipated  life. 
The  Vulgate,  "  aed  Hon  pratakhit,^'  is  incor- 
rect. 

Verses  13,  14.  Farther  descHptinn  of  the  tnir- 
like  deeiU  nf  Antitx/ivx  Magnus.  For  the  king 
of  the  north  shall  return,  and  set  forth  i  rather 
"shall  again  .'^et  forth")  a  multitude,  greater 
than  the  former.  This  new  adventure  falls 
fully  thirteen  years  after  the  defeat  of  Anti- 
ochus near  Raphia.  Not  until  he  had  carried 
on  fortunate  wars  during  an  extended  period 
against  the  Parthians.  the  Bactrians.  and  even 
to  the  borders  of  India,  and  until  he  had  like- 
wise conquered  Asia  Minor  and  the  Thracian 
Chersonnesus,  did  he  turn  his  arms  against 
Egypt  in  B,C,  203,  where  Ptolemy  Philopater 
had  recently  died  and  left  the  throne  to  his  sou 
Epiphanes,  a  child  of  five  years,  who  was  placed 
under  the  guardianship  of  the  voluptuous  and 
cruel  Agathocles.  In  league  with  Philip  of 
Macedon,  who  concluded  a  formal  treaty  for  the 
division  of  the  Egyptian  empire  with  him,  he 
advanced  toward  Egypt  at  the  head  of  the  im- 
mense army  which  he  had  formed  whUe  engaged 
in  his  protracted  eastern  wars,  and  which  he 
had  especially  strengthened  by  the  addition  of  a 
great  number  of  Indian  elephants,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  depriving  it  again  of  Phceuicia  .and 
southern  Syria;  see  Justin.,  XXX.  2;  XXXI. 
1  ;  Polyb.,  XV.  20;  Jerome,  on  this  p.issage. — 
And  shall  certainly  come  after  certain  years ; 
rather,  "and  toward  the  end  of  times  he  shall 
come  (repeatedly)  during  a  period  of  year.s. " 
The  "  times "  at  who.se  end  his  annually  re- 
peated coming  shall  begin  (3"'"^,  during  several 
years,  as  in  v,  8  b)  are  the  thirteen  years  be- 


*   [Keil.    however,    somewhat    arbitrarily    declares    that 
"  "IT^nn,  with  the  article,  can  only  be  the  hott  of  the 

king  of  the  north."  He  contends  that  "the  meaning  ii 
this :  '  As  the  multitude  rises  up,  so  his  heart  i^  lifted 
up.'  "1 


244 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


tween  the  battle  near  Raphia  and  the  death  of 
Ptolemy  Philopater  (B.C.  217-204).  —With  a 
great  avmy  and  with  much  riches  (rather, 
"  equipment ").  In  connection  with  this  equip- 
ment we  are  probably  to  conceive  of  the  rich 
treasures  secured  in  past  ware,  in  addition  to 
the  Indian  elephants.  — And  in  those  times  there 
shall  many  stand  up  against  the  king  of  the 
south.  Insurrections  occurred  in  upper  Egjpt 
as  early  as  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Ptolemy 
Epiphanes,  occasioned  by  the  bad  administra- 
tion and  the  cruelty  of  his  guardian  Agathocles  ; 
and  these  svere  followed  in  subsequent  years  by 
renewed  insurrections,  the  revolt  of  subjugated 
countries,  etc.  Before  his  eighth  year  had 
expired,  the  king  was  obliged  to  conquer  Lycop- 
olis,  a  stronghold  of  the  rebels  (see  Corjy.  inscr., 
III.  339  :  Inset:  of  Rosettn,  20,  2(5,  28;  Jerome, 
on  the  passage). — Also  the  robbers  of  thy  peo- 
ple shall  exalt  themselves  ;  rather.  "  and  crim- 
iual  sons  of  thy  people  .shall  revolt."  The  literal 
reading  is,  "  and  sons  of  the  ravenous  ones,  of 
the  oppressors  of  thy  people. "  2"'^"'~S  denotes 
persons  who  overturn  the  law  and  justice  (of. 
Psa.  xvii.  4;  Ezek.  vu.  22  ;  xviii.  10;  Isa.  xxxv. 
9),  hence  violent  persons,  robbers.  With  regard 
to  the  occurrence  of  two  Stat,  constr.  in  imme- 
diate succession  C^::^"?:  t;).  which  must  not  be 
strained  so  as  to  denote  robbers'  sons,  robbers  by 
birth  (Fiiller),  cf.  the  examples  collected  by 
Evvald  (Le?irb.,  %  289  c).  The  oracle  refers  to 
the  league  against  Egypt,  into  which  a  large 
number  of  Jews  entered  with  Antiochus  the 
Great,  and  to  theii'  participation  in  his  warlike 
operations  agamst  that  country,  e.g.,  in  his 
attacks  on  the  gaiTison  which  the  Egyptian 
general  Scopas  had  left  in  the  citadel  of  Jerusa- 
lem (.losephus.  Ant.,  XII.  3,  3).  The  theo- 
cratic writer  sternly  condemns  this  partial  revolt 
to  the  Syrians  as  a  criminal  course  or  as  common 
robbery,  because  of  the  many  benefits  conferred 
on  the  Jewish  nation  by  the  earlier  Ptolemies.— 
To  establish  the  vision  (rather,  "  %-isions "), 
namely,  the  visions  respecting  the  afflictions  of 
the  Jews  under  Ant.  Epiphanes  already  recorded 
in  chap.  viii.  and  ix. ,  which  could  appropriately 
be  regarded  as  a  consequence  or  punishment  of 
the  revolt  from  the  Egyptians  as  here  described. 
V'^  is  used  collectively  in  this  passage,  in  the 
sense  of  "what  there  is  of  prophecy,  such 
visions  as  exist." — But  they  shall  fall.  ^Vf?-. 
does  not  probably  denote  stumbUng  or  falling  in 
a  moral  point  of  view  (Hiivemick,  etc.),  but  to 
be  unfortunate  in  war,  to  be  oppressed  politi- 
cally and  religiously,  etc.  The  special  event 
referred  to,  whether  a  punishment  imposed  by 
Scopas,  in  the  shape  of  taking  away  various 
nobles  as  hostages  (cf.  Polyb..  XVI.  39;  Jose- 
phus.  Ant.,  XII.  3,  4),  or  otherwise,  must  remain 
undetermined.  It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  at 
any  rate  this  particular  passage  presents  a  some- 
what considerable  discrepancy  between  the  pro- 
phetic text  of  the  section  and  the  corresponding 
historical  events  ;  cf.  Kranichfeld  on  the  pas- 
sage, p.  368.  * 


•  [It  certainly  may  with  justice  **  be  denied  that  there  is 
here  su(;h  a  dixcrepnucy."'  There  is  indeed,  some  indistinct 
nesH,  owing  chiefly  to  onr  inability  to  determine  the  exact 
application  of  the"  term  "fall"  here.     It  is  clear,  however. 


Verses  15-19.  Last  wars  and  death  of  Anti- 
ochiis  Magnus.  So  (rather,  "and")  the  king 
of  the  north  shall  come,  and  cast  up  a  mount, 
and  take  the  most  fenced  cities;  rather,  "a 
strongly  fortified  city."  The  reference  is  proba- 
bly to  the  siege  and  ultimate  capture  of  Sidon, 
into  which  "  city  of  fortifications  "  (ri~.^3'^  "l""". 
cf.  Ewald,  §  177  c)  the  Egyptian  leader  Scopas 
had  thrown  himself  after  suffering  a  severe 
defeat  at  the  h.ands  of  Antiochus  at  Paneas, 
near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan,  which  reduced 
his  army  to  10,000  men  (B.C.  198).  WTiile 
Antiochus  was  carryi'jg  on  a  war  in  Asia  Minor 
against  Attalus  in  'Jvj  preceding  year,  Scopas 
had  again  brought  Crfie  Syria  under  the  domin- 
ion of  Egypt ;  but  )  j  consequence  of  that  terri- 
ble defeat  he  wau  deprived  not  only  of  that 
province,  but  also  of  the  whole  of  Palestine  as 
far  as  Gaza  by  the  Syrian  king.  After  endur- 
ing a  protracted  siege  in  Sidon,  in  the  course  of 
which  an  Egyptian  army  under  Eropus.  Meno- 
cles,  and  Damoxenus  had  vainly  attempted  to 
extricate  him,  he  was  compelled  by  hunger  to 
surrender  himself  into  the  victor's  hands  (Polyb  , 
XXVIII.  1;  Livy.  XXXIII.  19;  Josephus  and 
Jerome,  1.  c).  The  text,  consequently,  does 
not  expressly  notice  the  repeated  advance  of  the 
Egyptians  and  the  great  battle  near  Paneas.  but 
contents  itself  with  referring  to  the  final  results 
of  this  new  war,  viz.  :  the  capitulation  of  the 
remaining  Egyptian  troops  in  Sidon.  The  idea 
that  '^?':  ^^5  is  used  collectively  (Theodot., 
Syr.,  Vulg.,  Kranichfeld)  must  be  rejected,  be- 
cause this  event  is  so  obviously  referred  to  as 
appears  especially  from  the  second  half  of  the 
verse. — And  the  arms  of  the  south  shall  not 
withstand,  etc.  ;  an  allusion  to  the  unsuccess- 
ful nature  of  the  attempt  made  by  the  three 
Egyptian  leaders  to  come  to  the  assistance  of 
the  besieged  Scopas.  msiT  is  evidently  used 
in  the  sense  of  military  forces  (arms  =  army), 
hence  not  as  in  v.  G  ;  on  the  other  hand,  cf.  vs. 
22  and  31.— Verse  10.  But  he  that  cometh 
against  him  shall  do  according  to  his  own 
will ;  i.  e. ,  Antiochus^  the  victor  of  Paneas  and 
conqueror  of  Sidon,  who  now  subjugated  the 
whole  of  Palestine  (the  "  pleasant  land "  or 
"  land  of  beauty," — cf.  on  chap.  viii.  9). — Which 
by  his  hand  shall  be  consumed  ;  rather,  "  and 
destruction  is  in  his  hand."  IT^?  '"'??i  ^s  in 
Isa.  X.  32  ;  cf.  xliv.  20  ;  Job  xi.  14.  If  there 
were  no  other  reason,  these  parallels  would  b( 
sufficient  to  show  that  ~b3  cannot  here  denote 
' '  to  constimmate  "  (Luther) ,  nor  yet  "  complete- 
ness or  totality."  which  would  result  in  the 
meaning,  ' '  and  it  is  lohotty  in  his  hand,"  i.  e. ,  the 
glorious  land  (Hiivern.,  Von  Leng.,  van  Ess, 
Fiiller,  etc.  ;  also  Bertholdt  and  Dereser,  who 


that  it  indicates  a  failure  of  their  expectations  :  and  of  this, 
in  the  case  of  the  apcstate  Jews  referred  to,  history  affords 
sufficient  confirmation.  '•  The  apostasy  of  one  party-  among 
the  Jews  from  the  law  of  their  fathers,  and  their  adoption 
of  heathen  custxims  contributed  to  brins  about  that  oppres- 
sion with  which  the  theocracy  was  visited  by  Antiochus 
Epiphanes"'  (Keil).  On  the  author's  view,  that  these  speci- 
fications were  interpolated  into  the  prophecy  by  a  later  hand, 
it  is  impossible  to  account  for  any  such  vagueness,  much 
less  "discrepancy;"  for  the  forger  would  certainly  have 
taken  pains  to  conform  his  language  to  the  w(U-kuown 
facts.! 


CHAP.  XI.  a-45. 


245 


prefer,  however,  to  read  n32).  * — Terse  17.  He 
shall  also  set  hi.s  face  to  enter  ■with  the 
strength  of  his  whole  kingdom.     "  To  set  his 

face  "is  equivalent  to  "fixing  his  aim"  upon 
something  ;  cf.  3  Kings  xii.  IS,  and  for  the  re.st 
of  the  sentence,  cf.  Psa.  Ixxi.  16 ;  Isa.  xl.  10. 
Livy,  XXXIII.  19,  plainly  asserts  that  Antiochus 
was  temporarily  inclined  to  follow  up  his  vic- 
tories in  Coeie-Syria  and  Phoenicia  by  a  power- 
ful attack  on  Egypt:  "  Omnibus  regni  viribus 
cotini.TUK,  cum  iKi/eiites  co]yia,i  terrestvfs  vmritim- 
UK/jue  ctimparfisset,'"  etc.  The  same  author  re- 
cords also  an  attack  on  the  cities  on  the  coast  of 
Cilicia  and  Caria  belonging  to  Ptolemy,  as  being 
an  introductory  step  toward  the  execution  of 
that  plan.  The  reference  of  the  text  to  this 
fact  is  so  unequivocal,  that  all  explanations 
which  do  not  accord  with  it  must  be  rejected, 
e.rj.,  that  of  Hiivemick,  Von  Leugerke,  etc.  : 
'■  to  come  nf/aiiift  the  strength  of  his  (the  I^yp- 
tian  monarch's)  whole  kingdom  ;  "  and  of  Fuller, 
"  to  come  in  the  poioer  of  his  (Antiochus')  whole 
kingdom,"  which  is  interpreted  to  mean,  that  he 
should  secure  the  complete  possession  of  the 
royal  power  throughout  Syria,  and  re-establish 
its  former  limits. —  And  upright  ones  with 
him  ;  rather,  "  and  an  agreement  shall  he  make 
with  him."  This  rendering  of  "IB?  C'lffiiT 
ntj'i  was  adopted  by  the  Sept.  (nai  awr/Ka^  ficr' 
avToit  Tvoiriacrai),  Vulg. ,  Luther,  Berth.,  Dereser, 
Von  Leng. ,  and  Hitzig,  although  the  two  la.st- 
named  writers  attempt  emendations  of  the  text 
(Von  Leng.,  ="'1^^':^  instead  of  a^"??'"'!  ;  Hit- 
zig, •'^'r?']  instead  of  '"^'f  J"!)  which  are  entirely 
uncalled  for.  It  is  certainly  obvious  that  the 
words  refer  to  the  treaty  concluded  in  the  year 
198  between  Antiochus  and  the  defeated  Ptol- 
emy Epiphanes.  by  which  Coele-Syria  was  left  in 
the  hands  of  the  victor,  and  in  connection  with 
which  the  marriage  of  Cleopatra,  the  daughter 
of  Antiochus,  with  Ptol.  Epiphanes  was  agreed 
upon,  although  not  consummated  until  five  years 
afterward  (Polyb.,  XXVIIL  17  ;  Josephus,  Ant, 
XII.   4,   1);    see  what  follows.     Such  explana- 


*  [Keil  aerain  objects :  '*  Here  also  the  historical  events 
fall  far  behind  the  contents  of  the  prophecy,  which  points 
v:>  the  complete  subjnqatron  of  the  king  of  the  south,  where- 
as this  war  was  carried  on  solely  for  the  possession  of  the 
Asiatic  provinces  of  the  Egyptian  kingdom.  Also  the  rising 
up  of  many  (S^i^"!,  ver.  14)  against  the  king  of  the  south  is 

not  historically  verified ;  and  even  the  relation  spoken  of  by 
Josephus  {AjlL.  XII.  ;^,  3)  in  which  the  Jews  stood  to  Anti- 
ochus tlie  Great  was  not  of  such  a  kind  as  t^i  be  capable  of 
being  regarded  as  a  fulfilling  of  the  'exalting  themst-lves '  of 
the  D'^^IB  '^r2,  ver.  14.  Still  less  docs  the  statement 
of  ver.  16,  that  the  king  of  the  north  would  stand  in  the 
glorious  land,  agree  with  the  T^h^  interpreted  of  the  con- 
duct of  Antiochus  the  Great  against  the  Jews  ;  for,  accord- 
ing to  Josephus  (Ant.,  1.  c).  he  treated  the  Jews  about 
Jerusalem  favorably,  because  of  their  own  accoril  they  had 
submitted  to  him.  and  had  supiwrtcd  his  army:  and  he 
pranted  to  them  not  only  indulgence  in  regard  to  the  obser- 
vance of  their  religions  ordin;inces,  but  also  afforded  them 
protection."'  These  minute  points  of  app.^rent  variation  are 
sufficiently  met  by  the  explanations  given  above.  We  can- 
not refrain,  however,  fr  'm  observing  here  how  completely 
these  seemintr  discrepancies  with  the  facts  of  history  dis- 
prove our  author's  theory  of  an  interpolation  of  this  part  of 
the  prophecy  by  a  later  writer :  for  such  n  person  would 
surely  have  been  careful  to  conform  his  writing  scrupulously 
tu  the  kjiowa  historical  dat,i.] 


tions  as  the  following  must  therefore  be  reject- 
ed. ''  and  upright  ones  shall  be  with  him," — i.e., 
the  Jews  (!) — "and  he  shall  succeed  in  if 
(Gesenius,  Winer,  etc.) ;  "  and  strong  ones  coma 
with  him,  and  he  conducts  it  successfully " 
(FilUer);  or,  "and  uprightness  with  him.  and 
he  shall  accomplish  it"  (Hiivernick,  Kranichf. ), 
etc. — And  he  shall  give  him  the  daughter  of 
women,  i.e.,  his  daughter  Cleopatra,  who  is 
here  designated  as  ''a  daughter  of  the  women  " 
(i.e.,  of  her  mother,  gi'andmother,  etc.,  who 
were  still  employed  with  her  education),  proba- 
bly on  acMiint  of  her  youth ;  cf.  Zech.  is.  9, 
where  ri:riS«~13  in  like  manner  denotes  a  young 
ass-colt.*  As  Ptolemy  himself  was  but  seven 
years  old  when  this  treaty  was  made,  the  agree- 
ment primarily  involves  a  betrothal  only,  the 
marriage  being  postponed  during  five  years  to 
B.C.  19if. — Corrupting  her ;  rather,  "to  destroy 
it,"  i.e..  his  league  with  Egj-pt;  his  purpose  was 
to  ruin  his  former  opponent  and  present  ally, 
nr'^na.jb  is  probably  to  be  taken  in  this  sense, 

without  substituting  r'^n'i'nj  for  it  with  Hit- 
zig, or,  with  others,  referring  the  suffix  to  the 
daughter.  If  the  latter  interpretation  ("to 
destroy  her")  were  adopted,  the  3  would  cer- 
tainly lose  its  telic  signification,  and  become 
consecutive:  "so  that  he  destroys  her,  so  that 
he  ruins  her  in  this  way"  (Kranichf.).  but  the 
following  clause  does  not  accord  with  this  view. 
— But  she  shall  not  stand  on  his  side,  neither 
be  for  him ;  rather,  ' '  but  it  shall  not  succeed, 
nor  re.sult  to  his  advantage,"  i.e.,  Antiochus 
shall  not  realize  the  expected  benefits  from  the 
agreement.  Others,  less  appropriately,  conceive 
of  Cleopatra  as  the  subject,  "«/i«  shall  not  stand 
on  his  side  Cf),  neither  be  for  him  ('?),  but  rather 
take  sides  with  her  husband,  the  kingof  Egypt  ' 
(cf.  Jerome  on  the  passage).  The  rendering 
preferred  by  us  is  supported  by  tlie  ex.actly  simi- 
lar expressions  in  Issi.  viL  7  ;  xiv.  34.  f — Verse 
18.  And  he  shall  turn  his  face  imto  the  isles 
(or  coast-lands),  andshall  take  many  (of  them). 
The  Kethib  -"■^'Jl  is  to  be  retained  in  opposition 
to  the  Keri  C'u3"'^1,  which  is  transferred  to  this 
place  from  v.  17  for  the  sake  of  analogy.  -"^T?' 
i.e.,  "the  isles  and  coast-lands"  probably  de- 
notes the  coasts  of  Asia  Minor,  which  Antiochus 

•  [■'  D'^lTSn,  of  wotneu,  the  plural  of  the  class,  as  in 

Judg.  xiv.  5"  (Keil).  The  plur.  gives  a  kind  of  superlative 
force,  indicating  her  choiceness,  beauty,  etc.] 

t  [Still  the  construction  proposed  is  harsh,  for  the  subject 
of  the  verb  is  naturally  QTi'tn  r3.    Her  destruction,  "  it 

is  true,  was  not  the  object  of  the  marriage,  but  only  its  con- 
sequence ;  but  the  consequence  is  set  forth  as  had  in  view, 
so  as  forcibly  to  express  the  thought  that  the  marriage  could 
lead,  according  to  a  higher  direction,  only  to  the  destruction 
of  the  daughter.  The  last  clauses  of  the  verse  express  the 
failure  of  the  measure  adopted.  The  verbs  are  fern.,  not 
neut.  ;  thus  the  meaning  is  :  .  .  .  '  she  (the  daughter)  shall 
not  stand.'  not  be  able  to  carry  out  the  plan  contemplated 

by  her  father.  The  words  ni~tl  ib'^ibT  t^b  not  stand 
for  "ib  n*^nn  Xb"!,  'she  shall  not  be  to  him,"'  or  '  for  him.' 
In  that  case,  R  j  must  be  connected  with  the  verb.  Ao 
cording  to  the  text,  i3*J<b  forms  one  idea,  as  IlID  X? 

impotent  (cf.  Ewald,  §  S70);  'she  shall  be  a  not  for  Mm, 
i.e.,  he  shall  have  nothing  at  all  frou",  her.'" — KeU.\ 


246 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


subjected  to  his  power  through  the  aid  of  his 
fleet  and  army  in  the  summer  of  197,  and  also 
Blacedon  and  Hellas,  which  were  attacked  and 
conquered  by  him  in  the  following  year,  after 
having  spent  the  intervening  winter  at  Ephesus 
and  crossed  the  Hellespont  in  the  spring  ( Livy, 
XXXIII.  19,98,40;  Polyb.,  XVIII.  84).* -But 
a  prince  ....  shall  cause  the  reproach  of- 
fered by  him  to  cease;  or,  "but  a  general 
(military  leader)  shall  stifle  his  scorn."  i.e.,  his 
scornful  and  contemptuous  declaration  to  the 
Itoman  ambassadors  at  a  meeting  in  Lysimachia, 
that  "  Asia  did  not  concern  them,  the  Romans, 
and  he  was  not  subject  to  their  orders"  (Polyb. 
and  Livy,  1.  c).  The  leader  (l^^I^,  as  in  Josh. 
X.  24;  Judg.  xi.  6,  11)  who  stifled  the  scomful- 
ness  of  the  Syrian  king  (rT'3U:n,  literally,  "to 
cause  to  cease  "  [to  tench  it  to  cease,  Luther] ), 
was  Lucius  Scipio  Asiaticus,  whose  brilliant  vic- 
tory near  Magnesia  on  the  Sipylus  in  Lydia, 
B.C.  190,  enabled  him  to  force  Antiochus  to 
conclude  an  ii.imediate  peace  on  very  severe  and 
humiliating  terras  (Polyb.,  XXI.  14 ;  Livy, 
XXXVIII.  3S;  Appian,  Si/r.,  38,  39,  etc.).— 
Without  his  own  reproach  he  shall  cause  it 
to  turn  upon  him ;  rather,  ' '  he  shall  assuredly 
give  him  back  his  reproach ;  "  he  shall  retaliate 
by  inflicting  a  more  bitter  reproach  on  his  part. 
'"33  in  this  place  is  synonymous  with  Tj^  or 
SS""3,  and  does  not  signify  "except  that" 
(Havemick).f — Kranichfeld  attempts  in  vain  to 
obviate  and  obscure  the  manifest  reference  of 
this  representation  to  the  defeat  of  Antiochus 
near  Magnesia,  as  being  an  artful  ' '  fabrication 
of  history  "  on  the  part  of  the  "  positivists  in 
prophetic  interpretation." — Verse  19.  And  he 
shall  turn  his  face  toward  the  fort  ("  foi-ts  ") 
of  his  own  land.  These  words  are  probably 
ironical ;  instead  of  advancing  against  the  for- 
tresses of  foreign  lands,  he  is  thenceforward  to 
be  employed  only  with  those  of  his  own  realm, 
perhaps  in  the  direction  of  placing  them  in  good 
condition  for  defence.  Fiiller's  remark,  that 
here  and  in  vs.  24,  31,  and  39,  QiTIJ'Q  denotes 
temples,  which  Antiochus  was  eventually  obhged 
to  plunder,  because  of  the  distracting  state  of 
his  finances,  is  entirely  too  ai-tificial  and  without 
adequate  supjiort  from  the  customary  usage  of 
the  term.  History  is  acquainted  with  but  a 
single  instance  in  which  Antiochus  pillaged  the 
temples,  viz.  :  that  of  the  temple  of  the  Elymaic 
Zeus,  or  Bel,  in  connection  with  which  he  was 
slain,  together  with  his  warriors,  in  a  rising  of 
ttie  people ;  and  it  is  arbitrary  to  argue  a  num- 
ber of  similar  acts  from  this  single  fact.  X — But 


*  [Tet  Keil  insists  that  "this  prophecy  of  the  undertak- 
ing of  the  king  of  the  north  against  the  islaniis  has  not  its 
historical  fulfilment  in  the  expedition  of  Antiochus  the  Grerit 
fteain^t  the  coa-ts  and  islands  of  A^ia  Minor  and  the  Helles- 
pont."] 

t  [Keil  objects  to  the  signification  vwreover,  assigned  to 
"^r  "3,  that  "in  all  places  where  it  is  so  rendered  a  negative 

sentence  goes  before  it.  cf.  Gen.  .^liii.  3 ;  xlvii.  18 ;  Jude. 
vu.  14,  or  a  sentence  asking  a  question  with  a  negative 
sense,  as  Auios  iii.  3,  4.     Hence  "^P33  here  has  the  idea  of 

exjcplloft,  and  can   only  be  rendered  after  an  affirmative 
statement  by  fiowevtr.  for  tlie  passage  introduced  by  it 
limits  the  .statement  going  Itefore.'*] 
X  [iJcvcrtheless,  the  plur.  here  is  not  to  be  strained  to 


he  shall  stiimble  and  fall,  and  not  (or,  ''nil 
more")  be  found.  Cf.  what  has  just  been  re- 
marked, and  see  Strabo,  XVI.  1,18;  Justin. , 
XXXU.  2;  Diodorus,  Fmgm.,  26,  39.  40.* 

Verse  20.  Seleiiciis  Phili^viter,  the  .wn  nnd  svc- 
cexnor  of  Antiochus  Mugiiti.s,  B.C.  187-17(1 
'I  hen  shall  stand  up  in  his  estate  a  raiser  of 
taxes  (in)  the  glory  of  the  kingdom;  rather, 
"  one  that  causeth  an  exacter  of  taxes  to  pass 
over "  (marg. ),  or  ' "  one  that  sendeth  out  a 
driver,"  to  the  ornament  of  the  kingdom.  The 
driver  was  obviously  a  collector  of  money,  or  of 
tribute,  and  the  person  intended  was  the  treas- 
urer Heliodorus,  who  was  sent  out  by  Seleucus 
Philopater  (according  to  2  Mace.  iii.  7  et  seq.)  to 
Jerusalem  to  confiscate  the  treasure  in  the  Jew- 
ish temple.  r^-P^  "'"''!',  "  the  splendor  or  or- 
nament of  the  kingdom,"  doubtless  designates 
Jerusalem  (as  does  also  the  "^X  of  Judasa,  chap, 
viii.  9i;  cf.  the  similar  laudatory  terms  applied 
to  that  city  in  Psa.  xlviii.  3  ;  1.  2  ;  Lam.  ii.  15. f 
The  accusative  0  1~n  accordingly  indicates 
the  direction  rather  than  the  measure  ("  who 
cau.ses  to  pass  through  the  extent  (?)  of  the 
land,"  FiiUer  et  al. ),  and  cannot  in  any  case  be 
regarded  as  a  nominative  in  apposition  with  the 
subject  ™.3i;  Ti:?^,  as  Kranichfeld  proposes, 
who  consequently  translates:  ''  (one)  who  shall 
lead  drivers  thither,  the  ornament  of  dominion." 
— But  in  few  days  he  shall  be  destroyed, 
neither  in  anger,  nor  in  battle.  Soon  after 
Heliodorus  was  despatched  to  plunder  the  tem- 
ple of  Jehovah,  B.C.  170  or  175,  Seleucus 
Philopater  was  suddenly  and  mysteriously  re- 
moved, possibly  by  poison  which  had  been 
administered  to  him  by  the  same  Heliodorus 
lAppian,  Syr.,  C.  45).  The  words  "aftersome 
(or  '  a  few  ')  days  "  doubtless  refer  to  the  brief 
interval  between  the  departure  of  that  officer 
and  the  king's  death,  rather  than  to  the  brief 
duration  of  his  reign  of  only  twelve  years,  as 
they  are  generally  applied.  |    On  the  statement 


e.xactncss,  and  the  temple  refeired  to  may  very  well  be 
taken  as  a  representative  of  the  native  fortifications,  t  spe- 
cially as  it  was  .so  vigorously  defended  as  to  cause  the  death 
of  the  assailant.] 

*  [Keil  still  insists  that  "  what  is  said  regarding  his  return 
to  the  fortresses  of  his  own  land  and  his  owii  throne,  does 
not  so  correspond  with  the  historical  Issue  of  the  reign  of  this 
iiing.  that  one  would  be  able  to  recognize  therein  a  predic- 
tion of  it."  Tet  such  a  prediction  has  actually  been  recog- 
nized by  interpreters  of  all  apes.] 

t  [Keil,  however,  objects  to  "  this  interpretation  of  the 
words  as  too  limited.  Ti;31  denotes,  no  doubt  (2  Kings 
x.xiii.  35),  to  collect  gold  and  silver ;  but  it  does  not  thence 
follow  that  C3"ir,  when  silver  and  gold  are  not  spoken  of, 

means  to  collect  tribute.  The  word  in  general  dcsignntea 
the  taskmaster  who  urges  on  the  people  to  severe  labor, 
afflicts  and  oppresses  them  as  cattle,     r^j^'^   "ITn  is  not 

synonymona  with  ^32n  TT^S^.  ver.  1(),  but  stands  much 
nearer  to  fl^Sb^  nin,  ver.  21,  and  designates  the  glory 
of  t/ie  kingdom.  The  glory  of  the  kingdom  was  brought 
down  by  1^312.  and  "I'l^T,"!  refers  to  the  whole  kingdom 

of  the  king  spoken  of,  not  merely  to  the  Holy  Land,  whiclt 
formed  but  a  part  of  his  kingdom.  By  these  oppressions  of 
his  kingdom  he  prepared  himself  in  a  short  time  for  destruc- 
tion."] 

t  [Keil's  objection  :  "The  reference  of  these  words,  '  i?t 
days  felp,^  to  the  time  after  the  pillage  of  the  temple  of 
Jerusalem  by  Heliodorus  is  not  only  an  arbitrary  proceed 


CHAP.  XI.  2^5. 


247 


that  be  was  to  be  destroyed  "  neither  in  anger, 
nor  iu  battle.'  the  remarks  of  Appian  respect- 
iug  the  mode  of  Philopater's death  {i;  (-i,ioi/.i/i;) 
should  be  compared.* 

Verses  '.21-24.  T/ie  rise  of  Antiochns  Epi- 
phrinex;  hk  first  Erjyptian  campaign.  And  in 
his  estate  shall  stand  up  a  vile  person.  ~": 
does  not  probably  denote  "  a  despised  one.  whose 
birth  deprived  him  of  every  right  to  the  throne  " 
iKranichfeld),  but  rather  one  who  is  deservedly 
despised,  who  is  despicable,  morally  contempti- 
ble, thus  corresponding  to  2S*"?",  Jer.  vi.  30. 
and  contrasting  with  -9^'?.  1  Sam.  xv.  9  (cf. 
Hitzig  on  the  passage).  The  symbolic  descrip- 
tion of  the  person  herL>  introduced,  as  a  "  little 
horn."  chap.  vii.  8  ;  viii.  9,  is  in  any  case  appro- 
priate. A  contrast  with  the  cognomen  E-ujiivi/^ 
was  probably  not  intended,  since  the  term  ap- 
pears to  be  one  of  the  original  constituents  of 
the  section,  rather  than  an  interpolation  ;  for  a 
Maocaba;an  interpolator  would  hardly  have 
avoided  the  temptation  to  avail  himself  of  the 
suggestion  afforded  by  the  famdiar  perversion  of 
EriooiVif  into  'E-iunvr/g  to  make  use  of  a  term 
like  "3r?,  for  instance  (cf.  1  Sam.  xxi.  ](>; 
Jer.  xxix.  20  ;  Hos.  ix.  7).— To  whom  they 
shall  not  give  the  honour  of  the  kingdom ; 
rather,  '"to  whom  was  not  given,"  etc. — who 
has  seized  the  royal  dignity  instead,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  will  of  bis  nation.  Cf.  the  Eth. - 
fund,  principles,  etc.,  on  chap  vii..  No.  3;  and 
with  reference  to  the  expression  nz:"  "in,  cf. 
1  Chron.  xxix.  2.1 ;  Psa.  xxi.  0.  — He  shall  come 
in  peaceably  (or  "  unexpectedly  "—~';!:™2,  as 
in  V.  24  and  chap.  viii.  2.'))  zuid  obtain  the  king- 
dom by  flatteries ;  rather,  by  •'dissimulations." 
r"~"~;~  does  not  denote  smooth  speeches  or 
flatteriug  words  merely,  but  dissimulating  words 
and  actions,  a  hypocritical  and  deceitful  bearing 
in  both  word  and  deed.  It  occurs  in  the  same 
sense  iu  v.  34.  The  historical  tradition,  indeed, 
speaks  only  of  the  application  of  military  force 
by  Antiochus.  when  seeking  to  obtain  the  Syrian 
throne  for  himself,  and  of  the  assistance  which 
Eumenes  and  Attains  rendered  him  to  that  end, 
by  expelling  the  usurper  Heliodorus.  But  this 
assuredlj-  did  not  exclude  the  employment  of  all 
manner  of  cunning  arts  aiid  secret  manceuverings. 
which  probably  were  the  only  means  by  which 
he  could  secure  the  countenance  of  those  kings 

ing,  biit  is  also  contrary  to  the  impoi't  of  the  words,  unce  3 
in  B*72'^S  does  not  mean  past,'^  has  little  force,  even  if 
we  accept  his  interpretation  of  w312  preceding;  for  that 

term  evidently  constitutes  a  fresh  date  or  startuig-iK)int.] 

*  [Kc'il  once  more  lirKes  that  "of  Seleucus  Philopater,  to 
whom  ver.  20  must  refer,  if  the  forc^^oint,'  verses  treat  of 
Antiochus  the  Great,  nothing  further  is  conimuiiicatcd  than 
that  he.  *  qutoii  paterntu  clmW^un  fiacta.-i  atCmuUttni  Syricp 
.  Oliet  acceiJis^ft,  pu^t  otiosuia  inttlmgtte  (tdittoUuiH  rebttH 
Oestis  nobitUaiuin  annwum  ttundeciin  reffiaan/  was  put  to 
death  through  the  treachery'  of  Heliodorus.  iniiuH  ex  pur- 
yuratts  i  Livy.  XLI.  19 ;  cf .  App.,  Syr.,  C.  45),  and  the  mis- 
sion of  Heliodorus  to  Jerusalem  to  seize  the  treasures  of  the 
temple,  which  is  fabulously  described  in  2  Mace.  iii.  4  ff. 
The   ~,Z^'^  (sAa/i    be   demrvijed)    of    this    king  S"';3^a 

^■^"nsi  {within  a  few  days)  does  not  harmrnize  with  the 
tact  of  his  twelve  yeaira'  reign."] 


of  Pergamos.  The  difference  between  the  lan- 
guage of  the  passage  and  the  historical  fact  is  al 
any  rate  inconsiderable ;  and  it  is  not  necessary 
to  assume  that  to  obviate  that  difficulty  the  Sept. 
substituted  the  more  appropriate  "iPj'!!?  oi 
n;rbn2  for  mpVpjnZi  and  translated  it  by 
narifjxl Off  fiacf/nt;  iv  K?.r/fioi'intjlf2  avr<n\  on  the 
ground  th.at  they  ''could  find  no  historical 
equivalent  for  the  former  term  "  (against  Kran- 
ichfeld). — Verse  22.  And  -with  the  arms  of  a 
flood  shall  they  be  overflown  from  before 
him;  rather,  "and  the  overflowing  power  of 
the  host  shall  be  swept  away  and  broken  before 
him ;  "  literally,  ' '  and  the  arms  of  the  over- 
flowing— before  his  face  they  shall  be  swept 
away,"  etc.  On  nJ!^'..  cf.  vs.  15,  31 ;  on  tl2'.i"i 
cf.  chap.  ix.  26.  The  tropical  expression  TinT 
^?'?~.  when  taken  as  a  whole,  involves  a  meta- 
phor that  Ls  not  entirely  unmixed,  similar  to 
Cl^i'w  w"!-,  "the  overflowing  scourge,"  in  Isa. 
xxviii.  15.  The  "overflowing  hosts  "  probably 
represent  in  part  the  troops  of  Heliodorus.  whom 
Antiochus  routed  with  the  assistance  of  his  Per- 
gamenian  allies,  and  in  part  the  Egyptian  forces 
which  sought  to  deprive  him  of  Ccele-Syria  soon 
after  his  accession  to  the  throne.  "  For  after 
the  death  of  Cleopatra  (v.  17),  Eulaus  and 
Lenaius,  the  guardians  of  her  son,  Ptolemy 
Philometor,  demanded  the  cession  of  Ccele- 
Syria.  the  dowry  which  had  hitherto  been 
refused  (Polyb..  XXVIII.  1;  Diodor.,  Leg.  18, 
p.  U24  Wess.  ;  Livy,  XLII.  49).  Antiochus,  on 
the  other  hand,  would  not  aclmowledge  that  his 
father  had  promised  such  a  dowry  (Polyb., 
XXVIII.  17),  and  therefore  refused  to  grant 
it.  Finding  that  the  Egyptians  were  preparing 
for  war,  he  took  the  initiative,  and  succeeded  in 
defeating  the  generals  of  Ptolemy  between  the 
Casian  mountains  and  Pelusium.  On  every  cal- 
culation, that  event  transpired  in  B.C.  171  " 
(Hitzig). — Yea,  also  the  (rather,  "a'')  prince 
of  the  cove'aant;  supply  "'"'r"^.,  "shall  be 
broken."  The  person  refen-ed  to  was  probably 
the  high  priest  Onias  III.,  who  was  put  to 
death  by  command  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  in 
the  year  172,  and  hence  about  the  time  of  the 
war  between  that  king  and  Ptol.  Philometor. 
He  was  denominated  a  I^^r?  in  chap.  ix.  20 
(see  on  that  passage),*  and  here  bears  the  title 
of  r"'";?  ""'?■,  "prince  of  the  covenant,"  be- 
cause he  was  the  actual  head  of  the  theocracy 
at  that  time  ;  cf.  the  repeated  designation  of 
the  theocracy  by  the  term  ""''".?  in  the  follow- 
ing verses,  r.g.,  vs.  28  and  32  (thus  correctly 
Theodoret,  Rosenm.,  Hitzig,  Hofm.,  Fuller).  A 
majority  of  recent  writers  refer  this  expression 
to  Ptol.  Philometor;  but  this  is  opposed  (1)  by 
the  fact  that  at  the  time  which  is  here  indi- 
cated, that  jirince  was  by  no  means  in  league 
with  Antiochus ;  (2)  that  if  it  were  really  in- 
tended to  represent  him  as  having  entered  into 
such  an  alliance,  it  would  have  been  necessary 
to  employ  the  words  1""'".3    l''3]",  or  rather  "^3 

*  [The  fact  that  he  Is  not  here  styled  rT^*— ^   serves  to 
distinguish  him  from  the  persotln^o  bo  dcsignate'l  there.] 


24S 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


iri-ia  (cf.  Gen.  xiv.  13)  ;  (3)  that  the  Egyptian 
18  always  designated  as  SSSn  "fM  in  this  chap- 
ter, while,  on  the  other  hand,  n^"";?  always 
refers  to  the  theocracy.  * — Verse  23.  And  after 
the  leag^ue  made  with  him  he  shall  work  de- 
ceitfully, I.e.,  as  soon  as  he  shall  have  estab- 
lished friendly  relations,  and  allied  himself  with 
his  defeated  opponent,  which  his  victory  near 
Pelusium  enabled  him  to  accomplish.  Even 
while  the  battle  was  raging,  Antiochus  dis- 
played great  kindness  toward  the  Egyptians, 
everywhere  interfering  to  check  the  slaughter 
by  his  soldiers,  and  thus  won  the  hearts  of  his 
foes  (see  Diodorus,  E.xc.  in  Wess.,  p.  579).  This 
conduct  seems  to  have  subsequently  been  of 
material  value  to  him  in  the  capture  of  Pelu- 
sium, Memphis,  and  generally  of  all  lower  and 
central  Egypt  (cf.  Diodor.,  1.  c.  ;  Polyb., 
XXVIII.  10  et  seq.  ;  Jerome,  on  this  passage). 
— And  shall  come  up,  and  shall  become  strong 
(or  "  prevail  ")  with  a  small  people,  unexpect- 
edly. Of.  Jerome:  "  Ascendit  Memphm  et  ibi 
ex.  more  JEgyriti reynum  aceipiens  puerique  {i.e., 
Ptolemwi  Philametoris)  rebus  se  providere  dicens, 
cum  modico  pypulo  mnnem  ^-Egyptum  subjugai'it 
sibi,  et  abundantes  atque  uberrmas  ingressus  est 
civitates."  Several  expositors  propose  to  refer 
~??"  to  the  king's  invasion  of  Coele-Syria  and 
Palestine  only,  instead  of  understanding  his 
victorious  march  up  the  Nile  as  far  as  Memphis 
(.e.g.,  Kranichfeld,  Hofmann,  Ewald,  and  espe- 
cially Ftdler,  who  had  already  interpreted  the 
preceding  n^'-an-,-;— )?2q  as  referring  to  the 
league  of  Antiochus  with  the  Pergamenian 
kings  Euraenes  and  Attains) ;  but  this  inter- 
rupts the  regular  progress  of  the  narrative  by 
transposing  an  event  from  the  beginning  of  the 
war  to  the  history  of  its  close.  n";bra,  "  unex- 
pedly,"  is  probably  to  be  included  in  this  verse, 
as  Von  Lengerke,  Hitzig,  etc.,  propose.  It 
states  that  the  victor  hatl  penetrated  into  the 
heart   of   their   country  before   the   Egyptians 


'  *  [Keil  objects  that  the  interpretation  of  this  cntting  off 
of  the  "  prince  of  the  covenant,"  as  referring  to  the  murder  of 
Onias  III..  "  is  not  warranted  by  the  facts  of  history.  That 
murder  doe.«  not  at  all  relate  to  the  matter  before  us,  not 
only  because  the  Jewish  high-priest  at  Antioch  did  not  sus- 
tain the  relation  of  a  '  prince  of  the  covenant,'  but  also 
becp.iise  the  murder  was  perpetrated  without  the  previous 
knowledge  of  Antiochus,  and  when  the  matter  was  reported 
to  him,  the  murderer  was  put  to  death  by  his  Cijmmand  ^2 
Mace.  iv.  .^6-^)."  Still  the  fact  remains  that  Onias  was 
slain  by  his  agents,  however  much  he  disavowed  or  even 
regretted  the  occurrence.  To  deny  the  propriety  of  the 
epithet  "prince  of  the  covenant"  as  a  title  of  the  high-priest 
is  arbitrary,  as  also  the  interpretation  :  "We  must,  there- 
fore, with  Kranichfeld,  understand  ri'l^a  1^32,  in  unde- 
fined generality,  of  covenant  princes  in  general."  There  is 
little  force  in  Stuart's  comment  that  the  latter  phrsse  is 
*'  not  the  high-priest  Onias.  the  prince  of  the  Jewish  coven- 
ant, as  Rosenmiiller  maintains,  for  then  Ti^i^Sn  would  of 

coarse  be  employed.      r^"l2  is  designed  for  a  mere  adjec" 

tjve  of  quality  or  condition  here,  and  the  article  is  omitted, 

»s  it  is  more  generally  in  such  cases If  RosenmoUer 

be  in  the  riglit,  the  order  of  time  would  be  inverted,  and  a 
varepov  Trpdrrpov  must  consequently  be  admitted  in  the 
course  of  the  narrative,  which  is  improbable."  "  The 
absence  of  the  article  in  T'^-S  is  no  proof  against  the 

reference  of  the  word  to  the  holy  covenant.  The  article  is 
wanting  where  otherwise  the  dctermir)ation  is  found  from 
the  connection,  e.g.,  ch.  viil.  13"  (Keil).] 


were  fully  aware  of  the  fact,  or  had  made  ar 
rangements  to  resist  his  progress.  Hitzig's 
explanation,  "  vrith  conMence  (=  n^iS)  as  if 
he  were  not  in  an  enemy's  country, "  is  urmeces- 
sary  ;  and  also  that  offered  by  others,  "  with  a 
peaceful  object"  ("in  the  midst  of  peace," 
F tiller).  ^  Verse  24.  Concerning  nib'^'S.  see 
what  immediately  precedes. — And  he  shall 
enter  even  upon  the  fattest  places  of  the 
province.  The  extraordinary  fertility  of  lower 
Egypt  is  weU  known  ;  cf.  Plin. .  K  N.,  XXI. 
15:  "■  ^gt/ptusfrugumferiUissima"  etc.  With 
regard  to  the  genitive  combination  np~^  "'jO'i;", 
of.,  e.g.,  DIS  ^?.i"'?N,  Isa.  xxix.  19.  Concem- 
™S  '"'PI'?,  a  "territorial  jurisdiction  or  prov- 
ince," see  on  chap.  u.  48  ;  iii.  3. — He  shall  scat- 
ter among  them  the  prey  (rather  "prey" — 
without  the  article),  and  spoil,  and  riches. 
This  defines  ''  that  which  his  fathers'  had  not 
done,  nor  his  fathers'  fathers."  It  consisted  of 
an  immoderate  squandering,  by  which  he  not 
only  divided  among  his  soldiers  the  money  pro- 
vided for  carrying  on  the  war,  but  al.so  the 
spoil  of  Pelusium  and  all  other  booty  that  had 
been  acquired.  Even  the  Egyptians  (to  whom 
B'T'i  is  perhaps  to  be  specially  referred)  were 
not  excluded  from  his  liberality.  Thus  he  be- 
stowed on  each  Greek  a  piece  of  gold  at  that 
time,  while  at  Naucratis,  according  to  Polyb., 
XXVIII.  17.  His  unusual  liberality  dui-ing  this 
campaign  in  Egypt  is  also  attested  by  1  Mace. 
iii.  30.  * — He  shall  forecast  his  devices  against 
the  strong  holds,  even  for  a  time.  -""12312 
unquestionably  denotes  fortresses  in  the  proper 
sense,  or  strong  cities,  rather  than  temples,  as 
Fuller  supposes  (cf.  on  v.  19). — It  refers,  e.g., 
to  the  taking  of  Pelusium,  and  to  the  siege  of 
the  fortified  cities  of  Naucratis  and  Alexandria, 
etc.  (Polyb.,  XXVIII.  17-19).-ny-nyi,  "and 
that  until  a  time,"  i.e.,  until  a  time  that  has 
been  determined  by  a  higher  power — for  a  time. 
Cf.  B''^D  in  V.  8,  and  the  similar  terms  in  vs.  6 
and  13. 

Verses  25-37.  T/ie  second  Egyptian  campaign 
of  Antiochxis  Epiphanes.  And  he  shall  stir  up 
his  power  and  his  courage.  Concerning  1>'^7i 
cf.  bsn  lis-;  in  V.  2;  also  Psa.  Ixxviii.  38;  1 
Mace.  ii.  24. — Against  the  king  of  the  south. 
This  was  not  probably  Ptolemy  Philometor,  but 
his  younger  brother  Ptolemy  l?hyscon,  who  had 
thrown  himself,  together  with  his  sister  Cleo- 
patra, into  the  strong  city  of  Alexandria,  at  the 
time  when  Antiochus  was  conquering  Egypt, 
and  had  there  been  declared  king  in  the  stead 
of  his  brother,  who  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of 
the  Syrians.     After  the  departure  of  Antiochus 


*  ["  But  to  distribute  money  and  spoil  is  nothing  unheard 
of,  and  in  no  way  does  it  agree  with  the  '  fatte-t  provinces.' 
The  context  decidedly  refers  to  conduct  which  injured  thf 
fat  provinces.  This  can  only  consist  in  S"|uandering  and 
dissipating  the  wealt'.l  of  this  province  which  he  had  plun- 
dered to  its  injury  (anb    ['■o  th^rn],  dativ.  Incommndi).     A 

historical  confirmation  is  found  in  1  Mace.  iii.  211-.31,  To 
bring  the  provinces  wholly  under  his  imwer  he  devised  placi 
against  the  fortresses  that  he  might  subdue  them."— 
Ktil.] 


CHAP.  XI.  3-43. 


249 


I'occasioned  by  a  revolt  of  the  Tarsians  and  the 
Mallotes  in  Cilicia),  this  usurper  had  probably 
brought  the  entire  kingdom  into  his  power,  as 
seems  to  be  implied  in  Livy,  XLIV.  19  :  ^^  Anti- 
ochus,  Syria;  rex — per  honestnm  speciem  ynnjoris 
Ptolemm  reducendi  in,  regnum,  beUum  cum  min- 
ore  fratre  ejus,  qui  turn  Alexandream  teiiebat, 
yerens, "  etfC. — But  he  shall  not  stand;  for  they 
shall  forecast  devices  against  him;  i.e.,  de- 
spite the  magnitude  of  his  array,  this  Ptolemy 
shall  offer  no  resistance  to  the  Syrian  king 
("ibJ"  si,  cf.  viii.  4,  7  ;  2  Kings  x.  4),  because 
treason  in  his  own  camp  (cf.  what  immediately 
follows),  of  which  his  opponent  is  able  to  make 
skilful  use,  shall  cause  his  defeat. — Verse  26. 
Yea,  they  that  feed  of  the  portion  of  his  meat 
shall  destroy  him.  With  regard  to  ^S^B,  cf. 
on  i.  8.  The  l^arc  "'b^S  were  of  course  mem- 
bers of  the  royal  household  and  servants  of  the 
king,  therefore  serpents  whom  he  had  cherished 
in  his  own  bosom,  like  the  traitorous  "'"'7?  '?** 
in  Paa.  xli.  10  (John  xiii.  18);  cf.  v.  27  and  2 
Sam.  ix.  11  et  seq.  ;  xix.  29;  1  Kings  ii.  7; 
xviii.  I'J,  etc. — And  his  army  shall  overflow 
(or  "flow  away,  dissolve");  and  m<my  shall 
fall  dow^n  slain.  Concerning  the  "  flowing 
away,"  which  is  here  equivalent  to  "dissolv- 
ing, turning  away  to  flee,"  cf.  v.  22 ;  also  1 
Sam.  xiv.  IG,  where  31731  expresses  about  the 
same  idea.  On  the  second  member  of  the  sen- 
tence, cf.  Judg.  ix.  40  ;  1  Chron.  v.  22  ;  1  Jlacc. 
i.  18. — The  decisive  victory  of  this  *«!C»ftrf  Egyp- 
tian war  (the  I'livrtpa  iooiW,  2  Mace.  v.  1),  which 
Antiochus  achieved  over  Physcon  and  Cleopatra, 
was  not  gained  on  land,  so  far  as  we  know,  but 
in  a  great  and  fortunate  naval  action  near  Pelu- 
sium  ;  and  r]12^."'  li^nT  seems  to  be  applicable 
only  to  a  battle  of  the  former  kind,  not  to  the 
scattering  or  destruction  of  a  fleet.  Nor  is 
there  anj'  definite  record  of  treason  committed 
against  Ptol.  Physcon  by  the  Egyptians.*  But, 
after  making  due  allowance  for  this  discrepancy 
[?J,  the  whole  description  seems  more  appropri- 
ate when  applied  to  the  sewiid  Egyptian  cam- 
paign of  Epiphanes  than  when  it  is  altogether 
referred  to  the  events  of  the  former  war,  as 
Ewald,  Fuller,  etc..  attempt  to  do. — V«rse  27. 
And  both  those  kings'  heeirts  shall  be  to  do 
mischief.  This  does  not  allude,  probably,  to 
their  evil  designs  against  their  enemy  Physcon, 
but  to  those  entertained  agaiiiM  each  other  ;  cf . 
Prov.  xxvii.  19;  and  on  the  term  3'"'^?  (i-e., 
literally,  "  belonging  to  do  evil "),  cf.  Isa.  i.  5; 
Judges  V.  9.  The  two  kings  themselves  are  cer- 
tainly not  Physcon  and  his  victorious  opponent 
Epiphanes,  nor  yet  the  two  brothers  Philometor 
and  Physcon,  but  Antiochus  and  Philometor, 
who  were  leagued  against  Physcon,  and  concern- 
ing whom  Livy  (XLV.  ll)aud  Polyb.  (XXIX.  8) 
expressly  state,  that  at  that  time  thej-  had  taken 
the  field  in  company  against  the  latter  king. — 
And  they  shall  speak  lies  at  one  table.  Prob- 
ably an  allusion  to  a  particular  incident  which 


*  [The  expression,  "  those  wlio  eat  of  hvi  choice  food  pro- 
bably  meatiK  Lennseus  and  Jiulaeus,  the  guardians  and  state 
ministers  of  the  young  Vtolemy,"  the  same  persons  alluded 
to  in  the  preceding  verse  as  the  members  of  his  own  court 
cormpted  by  the  britws  of  the  Syrians. — Stuart.\ 


is  no  longer  known.*  Their  "  speaking  of  lies  " 
was  ntiturally  a  hypocritical  profession  of  disin- 
terestedness on  the  part  of  Antiochus,  as  if  his 
only  concerc  were  to  reconquer  the  kingdom 
for  his  nephew  Philometor  (cui  regnum  quart 
suis  viribus  nmulabut,  Livy,  1.  c. ),  while  the  lat- 
ter pretended  reverence  and  gratitude  toward 
his  uncle,  but  in  his  heart  was  anxious  to  have 
him  removed  from  his  path. — But  it  shall  not 
prosper,  i.e.,  their  joint  endeavor  to  overthrow 
Physcon  ;  the  latter,  ott  the  contrary,  retained 
possession  of  Alexandria  and  of  his  usurped 
crown.  — For  yet  the  end  shall  be  at  the  time 
appointed;  rather,  "for  yet  the  end  is  (re- 
served) to  the  appointed  time."  "The  end," 
namely  of  the  Syrio-Egyptian  wars,  and  conse- 
quently of  the  sufferings  of  Judsea,  which  was 
intermeiiiate  between  the  contending  kingdoms. 
The  time  indicated  by  "I^i'si  in  v.  29  is  not 
identical  with  this  fp.,  or  "  end  of  the  appoint- 
ed time,"  but  rather  that  denoted  by  YP.  ^'^.^^  in 
V.  40,  and  by  Tp,  ^"  in  v.  35. 

Verses  28-30.  The  third  Egyptian  campaign 
of  Antiochus.  Then  shall  he  return  into  his 
land  with  great  riches,  i.e..  with  much  booty, 
which  he  partly  secured  in  Egj'pt,  and  p.artly 
on  hia  homeward  march  through  Judjea.  which 
was  now  in  a  state  of  insurrection.  Cf.  1  Mace, 
i.  19,  20;  2  Mace,  v,  11  with  Livy,  1.  c— His 
heart  (shall  be)  against  the  holy  covenant. 
Cf.  the  detailed  descriptions  of  the  rapine  and 
other  atrocities  committed  by  Antiochus  while 
marching  through  Jud«a  ;  1  Mace.  i.  20-29  ;  3 
Mace.  V.  11-17.  nip  Tiiia  denotes  the  theo- 
cracy with  reference  to  its  territory  and  its 
adherents. — And  he  shall  do  exploits ;  rather, 
"accomplish  it,"  i.e.,  his  malicious  intention, 
the  design  of  his  23b. — Verse  29.  At  the  time 
appointed  he  shall  return,  and  come  toward 
the  south.  ISlTSb,  "at  the  appointed  time." 
i.e.,  the  time  appointed  by  Ood.  The  retereiice  is 
to  the  spring  of  the  year  B.C.  168,  in  which  .Anti- 
ochus began  his  third  campaign  against  Egypt, 
this  time  against  the  two  Ptolemies,  Philometor 
and  Physcon.  The  brothers  had  become  recon- 
ciled to  each  other  in  the  preceding  year, 
through  the  influence  of  their  sister  Cleopatra, 
and  had  made  common  cause  .tgainst  the  Syrian, 
whose  conduct  in  leaving  behind  bim  a  strong 
garrison  in  Pelusium  had  indicated  his  purpose 
to  secure  a  permanent  influence  over  Egypt. 
Incensed  by  the  course  of  the  Ptolemies,  Anti- 
ochus led  a  large  army  through  Coele-Syria  and 
Palestine  to  Egypt  iu  the  spring  of  168  ( primo 
vere,  Livy,  XLV.  11),  and  would  have  inflicted 
heavy  penalties   on   the  brothers   had  not  the 


*  [The  phrase  is  sutTiciently  jnstifiod  by  the  hypocriti'.-al 
alliance.  *'.!(  one  table  designates  the  dissembled  amity 
and  intimacy  of  the  parties,  who  said  and  did  all  they  could 
to  mislead  each  other"  (Stuart).  Keil.  after  interpreting  : 
"The  evil  doing  consists  in  this,  that  the  one  seeks  to  over- 
throw imd  destroy  the  other  under  the  cloak  of  feigned 
friendship ;  for  they  eat  as  friends  at  one  table,  and  '  speak 
lie^ ' — the  one  tells  lies  to  the  other,  professing  friendship. 
But  their  design  shall  not  succeed  :  "  yet  captiously  adds 
"All  interpretations  of  these  words  wliich  are  determined 
by  historical  facta  are  arbitrary.  The  history  of  Antio'hus 
Epiphanes  furnishes  no  illu.strations  for  this."  The  above 
league  affords  abundant  presumption  of  these  tacts,  even  U 
I  strictly  understood.] 


250 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Romans  interfered  (cf.  Livy.  1.  c.  ;  Polyb. . 
XXIX.  8;  Justin.,  XXXIV.  3).— But  it  shall 
not  be  as  the  former,  or  as  the  latter,  i.  e. ,  a 
success  similar  to  the  triumphs  of  the  iirst  and 
second  expeditions  shall  not  be  realized  ;  cf.  for 
instance,  v.  13.—  ?^~?,  "  as — so  also  ;"  cf.  Ezek. 
xviii.  4;  Josh.  xiv.  11  (Ewald,  Lehrb.,  p.  851). 
The  two  substantives  are  in  the  cus.  adrerhinlift. 
—Verse  30.  For  ships  of  Ohittim  (QiPS  Di^r> 
shall  come  against  him.  The  expression  is 
derived  from  Num.  xxiv.  24,  where  Balaam  pre 
dieted  the  humiliation  of  Assyria  through  the 
agency  of  ships  of  Chittim.  In  that  place  Grse- 
cian  ships  were  probably  intended,  but  the 
reference  here  is  certainly  to  ships  belonging 
to  the  Romans,  namely,  the  fleet  of  C.  Popilius 
Lajnas,  which  sailed  to  Egypt  after  the  victory 
over  Perseus  near  Pydna  (June  22d,  B.C.  1G8J, 
in  order  to  prevent  the  Syrian  king  from  subju- 
gating that  country,  as  he  designed  to  do  (Livy, 
XLV.  10;  Polyb.,  XXIX.  1).  It  is  not  neces- 
sary to  assume,  with  Beitholdt  and  Dereser, 
that  the  "ships  of  Chittim  "  denote  the  Mace- 
donian fleet  which  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Romans  at  the  victory  of  Pydna,  and  was  after- 
ward employed  by  Lasnas  for  his  voyage  to 
Egypt.  Aside  from  the  fact  that  Polybius  and 
Livy  do  not  mention  this  fact,  to  designate  ships 
that  had  been  taken  by  the  Romans  as  Mace- 
doiiiitn  vessels  would  obviously  be  inappropri- 
ate ;  and,  moreover,  the  customary  usage 
throughout  this  book  would  lead  us  to  expect 
2^?17  instead.  The  term  CRS  is  very  broad 
and  indefinite  in  its  application,  as  appears 
already  from  Gen.  x.  4.  It  denotes  all  the 
islands  and  coast-lands  along  the  northern  shores 
of  the  Mediterranean  sea.  beginning  with  Cyprus 
(which  is  referred  to  under  that  name  in  Isa. 
xxiii.  1.  12  ;  Ezek.  xxvii.  0),  and  extending  as  far 
as  Spain,  and  therefore  might  appropriately  be 
employed  to  designate  Rome  or  Italy  in  particu- 
lar (cf.  Knobel,  Volkerta/el,  p.  95  et  seq.).  The 
Sept.  is  correct  ('Puuaint)^  and  also  Jerome  ;  but 
the  latter  overlooked  the  adjective  nature  of 
O'^?  (plur.  of  ^P3),  and  therefore  inserted  a 
copula  between  the  two  nouns :  "  venient 
super  eiim  tneres  et  Rmnaid."'  — Therefore 
shall  he  be  grieved  (rather,  "discouraged") 
and  return.  It  is  known  that  Popilius  L^nas, 
on  meeting  with  Antiochus  four  miles  from 
Alexandria,  did  not  grasp  the  hand  extended 
by  the  latter  in  greeting,  but  at  once  pre- 
sented the  message  entrusted  by  the  senate 
to  his  care,  and  that  when  the  king  requested 
time  to  consider  its  contents,  the  Roman  drew 
a  circle  about  him,  and  did  not  permit  him  to 
pass  beyond  it  before  he  had  given  the  desired 
aniswer  (Livy,  XLV.  12;  Polyb.,  XXIX.  11; 
Appian,  %/•.,  60;  Ju.stin.,  XXXIV.  3).— And 
have  indignation  against  the  holy  covenant : 
.'io  shall  he  do;  or,  "and  shall  accomplish  it." 
FiiUer  says  well,  "The  rage  which  'le  was  un- 
able to  vent,  on  Egypt  is  now  turned  against  the 
holy  covenant;  in  his  displeasure  he  turns 
against  Israel,  without  being  hindered  "  ('icyi. 
as  in  V.  28).  Several  writers,  among  whom  are 
Rosenm.  and  Kranichfeld  (the  latter  being 
guided  by  his  desire  to  render  the  prophecy 
as  dissimilar  to  the  history  as  possible),  take 


the  preceding  -'^^,  adverbially,  and  regard  it 
as  qualifying  Z~_\'  :  "and  again  he  shall  have 
indignation."  etc.  z''^-  however,  is  not  used 
as  a  mere  auxiliary  in  any  other  part  of  this 

1  section  ;  and  the  return  of  the  northern  king 
from  Egypt  could  not  be  passed  over  without 
notice  in  this  place,  since  not  to  have  mentioned 
it  would  have  made  Ejypt  the  scene  of  the  sub- 
sequent warlike  operations  in  v.  31  a,  which 
would  thus  conflict   with  v.  31  J  (cf.  Hitzig  on 

I  the  pa,ssage). — He  shall  even  return  and  have 

I  intelligence  with  them  that  forsake  the  holy 
covenant ;  rather,    ' "  and  he  shaU  return,  and 

1  fix  his  attention  on  them,"  etc.  The  second 
"and  he  retm-ns  "  denotes  his  journey  to  Anti- 
och  from  Palestine,  where  he  had  halted  by  the 
way.  His  "fixing  attention"  (;5  ",-ir!i  ''^  ™ 
V.  37 ;  Job.  xxxi.  1  ;  Jer.  xxxix.  12)  on  the 
apostates  from  the  covenant  (r'll.S  "'^T^  = 
B":2^'iC,  V.  14)  is  to  be  understood  iu  the  sense 
of  affiliating  with  them,  who  became  his  favor- 
ites and  proteges,  and  for  whom  he  endeavored 
to  erect  a  new  and  idolatrous  system  of  worship ; 
cf.  1  Mace,  ii  18;  2  Mace.  vi.  1.  Also  infra, 
on  V.  39. 

Verses  31-36.  Attack)  on  the  sacved  institu- 
tions of  the  theocracy,  and  the  persecution  of  its 
faithful  adherents  by  Antiochus.  And  arms 
shall  stand  on  his  part;  rather,  "and  armed 
hosts  of  his  shall  remain,"  namely,  in  the  holy 
land.  Consequently  "i"I"r?l  ^""^^T  is  used  sub- 
stantially as  in  V.  15,  to  denote  the  standing 
still  of  an  armed  host  (cf.  the  leaving  of  a 
Syrian  garrison  in  the  citadel  of  Zion.  which  is 
mentioned  in  1  Maec.  i.  34).  The  usual  ren- 
dering is,  "  and  armed  bands  sliall  arise  from 
him  " — which,  however,  seems  more  appropri 
ate  and  conformable  to  the  context  than  Kran- 
ichfeld's  strange  interpretation,  "and  accom- 
plices (i.e.,  traitorous  Israelites)  shall  stand  up 
through  his  influence  "  (!).  1-^'?  probably  does 
not  signify  "  at  his  bidding  "(cf.  2  Sam.  iii.  37l, 
but  is  a  partitive,  or  rather  expresses  depend- 
ence on  the  possessor. — And  pollute  the  sanc- 
tuary of  strength ;  rather,  "the  sanctuary,  the 
stronghold. "  The  sanctuary  is  probablj'  termed 
the  stronghold  (tT3"3n,  an  apposition)  in  a  spiri- 
tual sense,  as  being  the  refuge  and  support  of 
Israel ;  cf.  Psa.  xviii.  3  ;  xxxi.  3-5  ;  Isa.  xxv. 
4,  etc.,  where  Jehovah  himself  is  termed  Israel's 
strong  tower  (Von  Leng. .  Kranichfeld.  FiiUer). 
The  reference  of  the  expression  to  the  fortifica- 
tions with  which  the  second  temple  was  cer- 
tainly provided  (1  Mace.  vi.  7 ;  v.  60)  is  less 
probable.  However,  cf.  1  Mace.  i.  37 ;  2  Mace. 
vi.  4. — And  shall  take  away  the  daily  sacri- 
fice. Cf.  the  parallels,  chap.  viii.  11-13  ;  ix. 
27;  xii.  11;  and  with  regard  to  the  historic.il 
fulfilment,  cf.  1  Mace.  i.  45,  54.— Verse  32. 
And  such  as  do  wickedly  ageiinst  (or  "by") 
the  covenant  shall  he  cotrupt  by  flatteries ; 
Hitzig:  "the  comJeniners  of  the  covenant,  its 
accusers."  The  n"''!?  ■S^"i";>3,  however,  are 
evidently  the  same  as  the  rill  i^Tj  in  v.  30; 
ri'^S  is  simply  an  accusative  of  specification; 
cf.  Ewald,  Lehrb.,  §  288,  2  et  seq. — qi;nn,  pro 


CHAP.  XI.   2-45. 


251 


perly,  "to  desecrate."  here  signifies  "'  to  cause 
to  revolt."  utterly  to  sever  their  union  with  the 
theocracy,  against  which  they  had  already 
sinned.  Consequently,  the  expression  does  not 
involve  a  tautology,  as  if  a  successful  effort 
to  lead  such  as  had  already  cast  off  their  al- 
legiance to  a])Ostatize  were  asserted.  Kran- 
ichfeld  interprets  very  harshly  and  arbitrarily, 
"  and  so  far  as  the  sinner  against  the  covenant 
is  concerned,  he  shall  pollute  it  (the  covenant) 
by  his  insinuating  deportment."  rip;n5. 
'"with  smoothnesses,"  i.e  .  with  smooth  words 
and  dissimulating  arts  (doubtless  including  de- 
ceitful/)cw»i(«-.i,  cf.  1  Mace.  ii.  17  et  seq. )  prob- 
ably differs  merely  in  form  from  np^p^ni  in 
V.  21  ;  cf.  V.  34. — But  people  that  do  kno'w 
their  God  shall  be  (or  "prove  themselves") 
strong  i/.e.,  to  resist  his  seductive  efforts),  and 
do  exploits  I  rather,  "do  it."  Cf.  vs.  17,  28, 
30.  and  for  the  historical  fulfilment,  see  1  Mace. 
i.  03  et  seq.  ;  ii.  3  et  seq. — Verse  33.  And  they 
that  understand  among  the  people  shall  in- 
struct (the)  many.  CJ"  i;'i2'i"a  does  not  de- 
note "  teac/iers  of  the  people"  (Dereser,  Hitzig), 
and  the  analogy  of  ^»^?'i"v3  in  chap.  ix.  22  is 
not  sufficient  to  establish  that  rendering. 
;iS^;p  is  rather  to  be  taken  as  equivalent  to 
int(Ui(/tns  (cf.  Sept.,  Theodot. :  ol  afrerni  /coi  ; 
Vulg, .  (locti),  in  harmony  with  the  usual  intran- 
sitive sense  ;'':iiTl  (see  chap.  i.  4,  17;  ix.  13, 
25).  This  rendering  finds  a  special  support  in 
the  contrasting  of  the  Bii'i2".^""C  and  the  C"i"'f  ~ 
in  chap.  xii.  10.  These  understanding  ones, 
i.e.,  these  genuine  theocrats.  e.g..,  a  Mattathias 
(1  Mace.  ii.  1  et  seq,),  an  Eleazar  (2  Mace.  vL 
18),  etc.,  shall  "impturt  understanding  (^:"^^% 
cf.  Joli  vi.  24)  to  the  many,  i.e.,  the  not  incon- 
siderable number  of  the  "  people  that  do  know 
their  God,"  v.  33,  who  were  faithful  to  the 
covenant  and  capable  of  being  saved,  and  of 
whom  1  Mace.  i.  (io  et  seq.  testifies  that  they 
were  somewhat  numerous. — Yet  they  shall  fall 
by  the  sTword,  and  by  flame,  etc.  "  They," 
viz.  :  the  many  who  hearken  to  the  voice  of  the 
understanding  ones,  not  the  latter  in  person  ; 
see  V.  35.  For  the  narrative  of  the  fulfilment, 
see  1  Mace.  i.  57 ;  ii.  38 ;  iii.  41  ;  v.  13 ;  3 
Mace.  vi.  11.— Verse  34.  Now  when  they  fall 
they  shall  be   holpen  with  a  little  help,  or, 

"they  shall  obtain  but  little  help"  (S5^  ^TJ), 
referring  to  the  efforts  of  Judas  Maccabajus  (1 
Mace.  iii.  11  et  seq. ;  iv.  14  et  seq.),  which  were 
not  sufficient  to  put  an  end  to  all  the  suffering 
and  persecution  at  a  single  stroke  ;  cf. ,  e.ij.,  1 
Mace.  v.  (50  et  seq.— But  many  shall  cleave  to 
them  with  flatteries,  or  "  liypocrisies  ;  "  i.e..  in 
addition  to  the  limited  aid  received  by  them, 
the  party  of  faithful  adherents  shall  absorb 
many  impure  elements,  which  associate  them- 
selves hypocritically  (ripipbni,  of.  on  v.  33) 
with  the  "  many. "  It  appeal's  from  passages 
like  1  Maco.  vi.  21  et  seq. ;  ix.  23,  that  this  was 
actually  the  case  in  the  Maccabasan  age,  princi- 
pally as  a  consequence  of  the  bloody  severity 
with  which  Judas  Maccabajus  treated  all  apos- 
tates [\  Mace.  ii.  44  ;  iii.  5.  8). — Verse  35.  And 
some  of  them   of  understanding  (see  v.  83) 


shall  fall,  e.g.,  certain  priests,  1  Mace.  v.  67; 
Eleazar.  2  Mace.  vi.  18,  etc.,  and  Judas  Macca- 
bajus  himself,  etc.  ";•-;;  can  have  :ao  other 
meanuig  in  this  place  than  that  in  which  it 
occurs  in  vs.  33  and  34. — To  try  ("smelt") 
them,  and  to  purge  and  to  make  them  white 
(or.  "cleanse  them"),  even  to  the  time  oi  thp 
end;  literally,  "among  them."  This  is  a  state 
nieut  of  the  Divine  purpose  in  imposing  the 
specified  sufferings.  "Among  them"  (-"?), 
i.e.,  not  merely  among  the  "understanding 
ones,"  but  also  among  their  followers,  among 
the  theocratic  party  as  a  whole,  which,  accord- 
ing to  v.  34,  stood  in  some  need  of  being  sifted 
and  purified.  '^■^.3?  alludes  to  the  separation  or 
removal  of  the  dross  that  was  expelled  by  thr 
qTi:;,  and  15??  to  the  polishing  and  brighten 
ing  of  the  metal  that  was  thus  freed  from  it*, 
impure  elements.  "  The  threefold  description 
is  also  probably  designed  to  indicate  that  the 
purifying  should  be  effected  by  various  processes. 
Not  only  are  the  pretended  adherents  to  Jeho- 
vah's party  to  separate  themselves  from  His  sin- 
cere followers,  but  the  latter  themselves,  incited 
thereto  by  the  example  of  steadfastness  and  self- 
denial  furnished  by  their  martyrs,  shall  cast  out 
from  themselves  everything  that  is  impure  ;  and 
thej'  shall  succeed  in  gaining  over  all  those  who 
share  their  convictions  in  their  hearts,  but  have 
been  hindered  by  fear  and  timidity  from  avow- 
ing an  open  connection  with  them.  In  like 
manner  a  Nicodemus  and  a  Joseph  of  Arima- 
thjea  were  induced  by  the  very  death  of  Christ 
on  the  cross  to  confess  their  allegiance  to  him, 
— Thus  Antiochus  attempts  to  annihil.ite  the 
party  among  the  Jews  that  is  devoted  to  its 
God,  but  succeeds  only  in  contributiug  to  its 
purifj-ing"  (FiiUer). — The  "time  of  the  end  " 
IT,""~?)  iovra  to  which  the  painful  process  of 
purifying  is  to  be  continued,  denotes,  in  the 
sense  of  the  prophecy,  the  end  of  the  pre-Mes- 
sianic  period  as  a  whole,  as  appears  from  chap, 
viii.  17;  ix.  27;  but  it  coincides  essentially 
with  the  end  of  Antiochus  himself. — Because  it 
is  yet  for  a  time  appointed  ;  i.e.,  the  period  of 
tribulation  shall  be  protracted  until  then ;  cf.  v. 
37. — Verse  ofj.  And  the  king  shall  do  accord- 
ing to  his  will.  The  ""  can  he  no  other  than 
the  one  hitherto  represented,  the  antitheistic 
persecutor  of  Israel,  the  king  of  the  north, 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  It  is  therefore  not  Con- 
stantine  the  Great  (Ibn-Ezra,  Jacchiad.,  Abar- 
banel,  etc.),  or  the  Roman  state  as  a  whole 
(Rashi,  Calvin,  etc.),  or  the  New-Te.st.  anti- 
christ (Jerome,  Theodor.,  Luther,  CEcolamp. , 
Geior,  Calov,  Kliefoth) — all  of  which  interpreta- 
tions contradict  the  context,  and  arbitrarily 
interpose  a  hiatus  of  centuries  between  v.  35 
and  the  closing  verses  of  the  chapter." — And 

*  [Keil  contends  for  the  last  of  the  above  views,  in  accord- 
ance with  his  adopted  theory  of  the  tinal  Antichriatiac 
■'  little  horn  :  "  hnt  his  ar^ruments  have  little  weight,  in  the 
face  of  the  adtiiitted  identity  of  the  persecuting  *■  king ' 
throughout  this  pas.sage.  Hh  chief  point  is  this:  "If  the 
contents  '  >f  vers.  3f>-4.^  lie  beyond  the  end  of  the  enemy  who 
has  hitherto  been  spoken  of.  then  ousht  his  destruction  to 
have  been  mentioned,  especially  since  witl  the  words,  '  to 
the  time  uf  the  end,  because  yet  for  a  time  appointed.'  ifr, 
35.  the  words  of  ver.  27,  'for  yet  the  end  of  the  time  ap- 
pointed,' are  resumed.  All  attempts  to  give  to  the  formal 
of  these  expressions,  ver.  35,  a  dijl'ercnt  moaning  from  thai 


252 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


magnify  himself  above  every  god,  f.  e. ,  subjec- 
tively, in  his  proud  imagination ;  cf.  2  Mace.  ix. 
13;  2  Thess.  ii.  4  ;  also  chap.  viii.  25.  Jerome, 
Luther,  FiiUer,  et<;.,  render  the  words,  "''against 
every  god;"  but  this  interpretation  of  i?  is 
antagonized  by  its  use  in  v.  37  J,  where  it  is 
likewise  connected  with  ^^3"*^.,  but  notedly  in 
the  sense  of  ''above." — And  shall  speak  mar- 
vellous things  against  the  God  of  gods.  Of. 
chap,  vii,  8,  "Zo'^  and  concerning  D'^-j?*  ^?*,  see 
chap.  li.  47. — And  shall  prosper,  ^.f.,  in  his 
undertakings  generally;  cf.  viii.  12,  24  et  seq. 
—  Till  the  indignation  be  accomplished ; 
namely,  God's  anger  against  His  people,  in 
whose  execution  He  employed  Antiochus  as  a 
scourge  or  "saw"  (Isa.  x.  15).  Cf.  viii.  19  ;  ix. 
27  ;  and  on  the  whole  expression,  see  Isa.  x.  23, 

Verses  37-39.  Description  of  the  general  god- 
lessness  of  Antiochiis  Epiphanes,  without  confin- 
ing it  to  its  relatiom  to  the  theocracy.  Neither  (or, 
"and  not")  shall  he  regard  the  god  ("gods") 
of  his  fathers,  hence,  shall  manifest  his  impiety 
even  with  reference  to  the  requirements  of  the 
religious  sense  of  the  heathen.  This  will  include 
his  robbery  of  temples  (Polyb.,  XXXI.  4),  and 
his  efforts  to  destroy  national  bounds  by  tearing 
down  their  several  religious  systems  (Diodor. , 
XXXI.  1  ;  1  Mace.  i.  4;:Jj.*— Nor  the  desire  of 
women,  nor  regard  any  god;  rather,  "nor 
the  desire  of  women  nor  any  god  shall  he 
regard."  In  view  of  the  connection  D"''»C3  T"!?:)! 
cannot  possibly  signify  anything  else  than  a  god, 


contained  iix  the  latter,  ver.  27  (Calovins.  Geier,  Kliefoth), 
amount  to  verbally  impossible  interpretations."  But  surely 
this  phrase  might  be  understood  to  refer  to  different  points 
of  time,  if  the  chanee  in  the  connection  required  it.  Even 
this,  however,  ia  not  necessary.  It  is  suflficient  to  apply  it 
to  the  general  'ssue  of  these  troubles  of  the  theocracy,  and 
thus  room  is  stiU  left  to  introduce  the  sequel  of  Antiochus's 
career,  which  in  fact  did  not  take  place  till  the  controversy 
about  the  Jewji^h  worship  was  pretty  well  decided  at  Jeru- 
salem by  the  first  successes  of  the  Maccabees.] 

*  [Keil  objects.  "This  does  not  agree  with  Antiochus. 
The  iffoflea  4>poi'€lv  i/Trepj/f^ai/ws  which  is  said  of  him,  2  Mace. 
ix.  12,  is  not  an  exalting  of  himself  above  every  god.  '  An- 
tiochus was  not  an  dfleo;  ;  he  even  wished  to  render  the 
worship  of  Zeus  universal ;  and  that  he  once  spoiled  the  tem- 
ple does  not  imply  his  raising  himself  above  every  god ' 
(Kliefoth).  Of  Antiochus  much  rather,  as  is  said  by  Livy 
(XLI.  30).  ^  indmibus  tanien  ho?ie><ttsqHe  rebiis  fere  reyins 
erat  animus,  in  urbinm  lionis  et  deurnni  cnitii.''  "  But  this 
misses  the  main  point  of  the  portraiiure  of  this  persecuting 
tyrant  throughout  the  entire  series  of  these  prophecies, 
which  is  not  wi  much  his  utter  godlessness  and  violence  as 
the  direction  of  these  iraiLs  against  the  hitherto  established 
u^ges  of  his  own  subjects;  Intolerance  now  first  made 
religion  a  crime,  and  foreign  deities  were  now  for  the  first 
time  forcibly  imposed  upon  them.  '"  The  next  verse  shows 
that  he  had  no  regard  for  his  country's  gotls  ;  and  his  whole 
ctjurse  of  hfe,  his  plundering  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  and 
finally  in  Elymais,  shows  the  reckless  and  impious  charac- 
ter of  the  tyrant.  .  .  .  The  intimation  here  given,  ofdiftre- 
gardi'tfj  the  goda  of  Inn  fathers,  shows  that  the  previous 
Gnecian  kings  of  Syria  had  a<:lopted  the  gods  of  the  Syrian 
nation  ;  while  Antiochus,  who  had  lived  some  yearsat  Romp, 
had  learned  to  despise  the  Syrian  gods,  and  to  prefer  the 
Jupiter  Olynipiufi  and  Xenias  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans. 
The  establishment  of  the  worship  of  the  former  at  Jerusa- 
lem, and  of  the  latter  at  S;imaria,  shows  that  Antiochus  was 
ambitious  at  times  of  imitating  the  Greeks  and  Romans" 
(Stuart).  For  this  he  was  naturally  applauded  by  Pagan 
historians,  but  the  sacred  seer  penetrates  the  motives  of 
policy  that  led  to  these  occasional  freaks  of  so-called  piet}'. 
and  paints  his  secret  contempt  for  all  religion.  That  the 
person  here  described,  however,  was  not  wholly  or  exter- 
nally irreligious  is  pmved  by  vers.  .38,  39,  which  bring  out 
the  precise  point  of  his  impiety,  namely,  its  foreign  charao- 
irr.) 


and  does  not,  therefore,  denote  chaste  conjugal 
love  (Luther,  J.  Gerhard,  etc. ,  who  support  their 
view  by  a  reference  to  ku'/kiv  -jn/iir,  1  Tim.  iv. 
3),  or  a  love  for  women,  susceptibility  to  amor- 
ous emotions  generally  (Grotius),  nor  yet  "  the 
supplications  of  women  "  (Dathe,  Staudlin),  or 
'■  the  favorites  ot  women,"  i.e.,  children  (cf.  Hos. 
ix.  IG  ;  Mic.  i  Ifi,  etc. — thus  Bertholdt).  We 
are  to  conceive,  rather,  of  the  goddess  of  nature 
among  the  Asiatics,  the  Baaltis,  Astarte,  or 
Mylitta  of  the  Babylonians,  the  Persian  Artemis. 
and  the  Nanaea  of  the  Syrians,  This  is  the 
more  certain,  as  it  is  expressly  reported  of 
Antiochus  that  he  had  inflicted  a  gross  indignity 
on  the  worship  of  this  goddess  (who  is  identical 
vrith  the  "queen  of  heaven,"  Jer.  vii.  18  ;  xliv. 
17  et  seq.),  by  attempting  to  plunder  a  temple 
of  Artemis  or  Aphrodite  in  Elymais  (Polyb., 
XXXI.  11  ;  Appian,  Syr.,  c.  f>6 ;  1  Mace.  vi.  1- 
4 ;  2  Mace.  ix.  2).  For  this  reason  modem 
expositors  since  J.  D.  Michaelis,  Gesenius,  Der- 
eser,  and  Havemick  are.  with  few  exceptions, 
agreed  in  applying  the  words  to  this  divinity. 
Concerning  the  designation  as  "'the  desire  of 
women,"  cf.  Isa.  xliv.  9,  where  the  heathen 
gods  in  general  are  characterized  as  fii~1?:ni 
"favorites."*  —  He  shall  magnify  himself 
above  allj  above  everything,  whether  Divine 
or  human  (the  addition  of  ijill?'  merely  to  Vjj 
would  be  one-sided).  Cf.  2  Thess.  ii.  4  :  f~' 
Trti-ra  /.fjoutrof  ^tiijv  tj  Gt^ianfia. — Verse  38.  But 
in  his  estate  shall  he  honour  the  god  of 
forces ;  rather,  ' '  but  he  shall  honor  the  god  of 
fortresses  in  his  place."  C''i5S  ri,!<  is  not 
properly  a  nom.  propr.  :  the  god  "  Mauzzim  "  or 
"  Mfeusim  "  (Luther,  following  the  Sept.,  Theo- 
dot. ,  and  the  Vulg.,  which  have  Mauitiu,  Mao- 
zim),  but  rather,  as  appears  from  the  repeated 
mention  in  this  chapter  of  D"^^???  (vs.  7,  10,  19, 
31)  or  niT^ra  (v.  15)  or  S'^'.??>a,  it  denotes  a 
martial  god  to  whom  the  Syrian  king  paid 
special  reverence — a  "  god  of  fortresses  or  cas- 
tles," who  must  be  regarded  as  being  Jupiter 
Capitoliuus,  because  he  is  subsequently  described 
as  formerly  unknown  to  the  Asiatics.  There  is 
no  question  respecting  the  character  of  this 
divinity,  as  being  pre-eminently  warlike,  nor  yet 
respecting  the  special  reverence  which  Epiphanes 
entertained  for  hira.  "  To  him,  the  Capitoline 
Jupiter,  were  devoted  the  »polia  opima;  he  was 
called  Jupiter  Stator,  because  he  brought  the 
Romans  to  a  stand  in  answer  to  the  prayer  of 
Romulus,  when  they  fled  before  the  Sabines. 
But  the  surname  Capitolinus  accords  fully  with 


•  [Keirs  defence  of  the  absti-act  interpretation  is  signally 
weak:    "A   verbal    proof   that    Q'>'i;d    rTHTSn    denotes 

Anaitis  or  Adonis  as  the  favorite  deity  of  women  has  not 
been  adduced.  For  these  words,  desUlerinm  niHtiernm, 
denote  not  that  which  women  de.sire.  but  that  which  womcc 
possess  which  is  desirable  ;  cf.  nnder  1  Sara.  ix.  20.  But  it 
is  impossible  that  this  can  be  Anaitis  or  Adonis,  but  it  is  a 
possession  or  precious  treasure  of  women.  This  desirable 
possession  of  women  is  without  doubt  tove  .■  so  that,  as  C. 
B.  Michaelis  has  remarked,  the  expres.sion  is  not  materially 
different  from  D^'j;r  ^,"t^,  the  love  of  woineit,  ^  Sam.  i. 

26."  On  the  contrar.v.  all  the  associated  terms  compel  uv 
Ut  understand  a  concrete  object  of  regard.  As  Keil  hiinsell 
admits,  "  The  connection  requires  us  to  think  of  a  dcirj', 
because  these  words  are  placed  between  two  expreSBions 
which  refer  to  the  gods."] 


CHAP.  XI.  3-45. 


253 


the  god  of  fortresse.s  ;  for  the  capitol  was,  so  to 
speak,  the  seat  of  the  Roman  empire,  the  arx 
omnium  naiumum  (Cicero,  ]'<■)•;•.,  VII.  72),  as 
being  the  citadel  of  Rome,  beside  which  stood 
its  temple.  There  the  generals  sacrificed  and 
paid  their  vows ;  and  when  they  returned  from 
their  victories,  they  were  taken  thither  in  tri- 
umph.— It  is  readily  conceivable  that  Antiochus 
should  honor  this  foreign  god  ;  he  had  learned 
to  know  him  and  his  worship  while  at  Rome." 
Antiochus  did  not,  probably,  regard  the  princi- 
pal god  of  the  Romans  as  distinct  from  the 
Olympic  Zeus  of  the  Greeks,  whom  he  adored 
with  a  special  zeal,  according  to  Livy,  XLI.  20  ; 
Polyb.  XXVI.  10  ;  2  Mace.  vi.  2,  and  for  whom 
he  caused  a  splendid  temple  to  be  erected  at 
Athens ;  as  a  genuine  Oriental  syncretist  he 
rather  identified  the  two.  Probably  the  mag- 
nificent temple  which,  according  to  Livy,  XLI. 
20,  he  began  to  build  at  his  capital,  Antiochia, 
but  which  did  not  arrive  at  its  completion,  was 
dedicated  indifferently  to  both  the  Capitoline 
and  the  Olympic  Zeus,  the  principal  god  of  the 
Romans  and  the  Greeks.  The  interpretations 
which  deviate  from  this  are  accordingly  to  be 
rejected,  e.g.,  that  of  several  rabbins,  Grotius, 
Bertholdt,  Stiiudlin,  etc.,  who  think  of  Man 
(who  was  evidently  not  a  god  of  fortre.sses,  but 
rather  a  god  of  battles),  and  that  of  Hitzig,  who 
proposes  to  read  f^  T>"p  n^j!«,  not  to  render 
"  god  of  the  sea  fortress,"  and  that  it  should  be 
referred  to  Melcarth  or  the  Tyrian  Heracles, 
making  only  the  latter  sentence  of  the  verse 
to  apply  to  Jupiter  Capitolinus.  The  correct 
view  is  advocated  by  Gesenius.  Dereser,  Von 
Lengerke,  Hiivemick,  Maurer,  Ewald,  and,  gen- 
erally, by  a  majority  of  recent  writers,  among 
them  Vaihinger,  Art.  Maissim  in  Herzog's  lienl- 
Encykloj).* — 'i:3"b",  "upon  his  basis,"  proba- 
bly indicates  that  Antiochus  should  honor  the 
specified  divinity  "  on  its  pedestal,"  hence  in 
the  form  of  a  statue  or  an  idol-image  (Bertholdt, 
Havemick.  Von  Lengerke,  Maurer,  Hitzig,  etc.). 
A  less  probable  opinion  is  that  the  words  refer 
to  the  temple  of  Jupiter  at  Rome,  as  being  the 
headquarters  or  seat  of  that  god,  to  which 
Antiochus  forwarded  gifts  (Kamphausen) ;  and 
finally,  the  rendering  "  in  his  stead,"  which  was 
formerly  current  (Luther,  Gesenius,  de  Wette, 
and  more  recently  Kranichfeld  and  Fuller),  con- 
flicts with  the  general  usage  and  with  the  con- 


•  [Keil  Rtill  objects  ;  (1)  "  But  according  to  the  following 
passage,  this  god  <  worshipped  by  the  person  in  question )  was 
not  la2»)\vn  to  his  fathers.  That  could  not  t>e  said  either  of 
Mars,  Jupiter,  or  Melkart."  Keil  has  overlooked  the  descrip- 
tion of  this  deity,  which  Is  not  his  ancestral  god  (although 
even  then  it  would  doubtless  mean,  as  in  ver.  37,  the  deity 
commonly  •.vor^hipped  in  the  country,  i.e.,  Asiatic  or  Syrian), 
but  "a  .«ra;iire  god"  (n;:    niiit,  ver.  39).     (2)  "Add  to 

this,  *  that  if  the  statement  here  refers  to  the  honoring  of 
Hercules,  or  Mnrs,  or  Zeus,  or  Jupiter,  then  therewith  all 
would  be  denied  that  was  previously  said  of  the  king's  being 
destitute  of  all  religion'  (Kliefoth)."  We  cannot  see  that 
this  last  discrepancy  would  lie  at  all  improved  by  the  iden- 
tification with  any  other  deity  whatever.  It  simply  shows 
that  the  latter  passjtge  must  not  be  so  strictly  interpreted. 
(-3)  ''The  words  thus  in  no  respect  l?) agree  with  Antiochus, 
and  do  not  permit  us  to  thiuk  of  any  definite  heathen 
deity."    Strange  then  that  the  descriptive  epith«t  Q''72'^ 

should  have  been  added  by  the  sacred  writer  if  he  had  so 
indefinite  a  worship  in  view,  and  stranger  still  that  he 
should  go  on  to  characterize  that  reverence  by  the  particti- 
ars  given  in  this  and  the  following  verse.] 


text,  because  the  preceding  verse  did  not  confint 
its  statements  to  a  single  Oriental  deity,  in  the 
stead  of  which  this  new  god  was  to  arise,  while 
the  sing,  suffix  in  1:3  can  hardly  be  held  to 
possess  a  "distributive  and  illustrative"  force 
(cf.  vs.  20,  21).* — And  (the)  god  whom  his 
fathers  knew  not  shall  hs  honor  with  gold 
and  silver,  etc.  This  god  with  whom  the 
ancestors  of  Antiochus  were  not  acquainted  was 
the  god  of  fortresses  just  mentioned,  not  a  dif- 
ferent god  (Hitzig),  and  still  less  gualiscungue 
Deus  aliiin  (Venema).  Livy,  XLII.  6,  expressly 
mentions  an  embassy  which  Antiochus  sent  to 
Rome  with  a  votive  offering  of  golden  vessels 
valued  at  500  pounds  (a  portion  of  which  would 
naturally  be  placed  in  the  temple  of  the  princi- 
pal god). — rriTp",  "jewels,  precioits  articles  of 

small  size,"  is  here  equivalent  to  mirT!  ""r:?)  2 
Chron.  xx.  2.5. -Verse  .39.  Thus  shall  he  do  in  the 
most  strong  holds  with  a  strange  god ;  rather, 
"  and  he  sh.all  pursue  the  same  course  with  the 
fortifications  of  the  fortresses  as  with  the 
strange  god  ;  "  i.e.,  he  shall  recognize  and  honor 
them  only,  shall  fi.x  his  attention  on  nothing 
else,  the  fortresses  are  liis  idnls.  The  words  are 
significant  merely  as  an  introduction  to  what  is 
to  follow  ;  D5  in  this  place  is  merely  a  stronger 
form  of  3,  cf.  Job  xl.  15  ;  ix.  26 ;  Psa.  cxx.  4 ; 
cxliii.  7  ;  Ecc.  ii.  16.  By  approving  of  this  ex- 
planation, which  originated  with  Ewald,  and 
which  we  are  compelled  to  consider  the  only 
one  that  accords  with  the  context,  and  that  is 
adequately  supported  by  the  general  usage  of 
the  liinguage,  we  reject  the  numei'ous  render- 
ings which  deviate  from  it,  that  have  been 
imposed  on  the  passage  from  of  old,  e.  g. ,  Vulg. , 
"  Et  faciei,  nt  mnnint  Manzim  cum  Deo  alieno, 
quern  rjognovit ;"  Luther,  "And  shall  greatly 
honor  those  who  aid  him  to  strengthen  Maeusim, 
with  the  strange  god  whom  he  has  selected ;  " 
Bertholdt  and  Dereser,  "And  shall  store  them 
(the  jewels)  in  the  temples  of  the  god  of  war; 
all  who  hold  with  the  strange  god,"  etc.  ; 
Rosenmiiller,  Von  Lengerke,  Havemick,  "And 
in  the  manner  which   has  been  described  he 


*  [On  this  Keil's  criticism  seems  in  the  main  to  be  just : 
'*  "133   ^3'  does  not  signify  on  hu  foundation,  pedestal, 

because  the  remark  that  he  honored  the  god  on  his  pedestal 
would  be  quite  inappropriate,  unless  it  had  also  been  said 
that  he  had  erected  a  statue  to  him.     133   ^V  has  here  tha 

same  meaning  as  in  vers.  20,  21,  and  7,  'in  his  place  or 
stead.'  But  the  suffix  is  not,  with  Kliefoth.  to  be  referred 
to   is   ^y,  'in  the  place  of  all  that  which   he  did  not 

regard,'  but  it  refers  to  {ni^i^   ^2,  'in  the  peace  of  every 

god  ; '  which  is  not  overthrown  by  the  objection  that  in  that 
case  the  suffix  should  have  been  in  the  jilur.,  because  the 
suffix  is  connected  with  the  sing.  HT^X.  The  '  god  of  for- 
tresses '  is  the  personification  of  war.  and  the  thought  ia 
this  :  He  will  regard  no  other  god.  but  only  war  ;  the  taking 
of  fortresses  he  will  make  his  god  ;  and  he  will  worship  this 
god  atjove  all  as  the  means  of  his  gaining  the  world-power. 
Of  this  war  god  as  the  o'jjectof  deiticalion,  it  might  be  said 
that  his  fathers  knew  nothing,  because  no  other  king  had 
made  war  his  religion,  his  god,  to  whom  be  offered  up  in 
sacrifice  all,  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  jewels."  We  must 
take  exception,  however,  to  the  incongruous  iJeaof  this  last 
sentence  respecting  the  deificaticui  of  an  abstract  passion  ; 
nor  can  we  see  that  in  any  reas^mable  or  conceivable  sensa 
this  could  be  said  to  charact^-rize  the  king  in  question — be  ba 
who  he  may — above  all  his  forefathers.] 


254 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


shall  proceed  with  reg-ard  to  the  true  feasts 
together  with  the  strange  gods,"  etc.  ;  Maurer, 
•'  Et  sic  ilk  versahitur  in  obtrudendo   urbibus 
miiiiitis  Jove  Capitoliiio^  qui  agnovcril  ilium" 
etc. ;     Krauichfeld   (and    similarly   de   Wette), 
'•  And  he  shall  do  it  to  the  defensive  fortresses 
with   the   aid    of    the   strange   god ; "     Fiiller, 
'•And  he  is  active  for   the   fortifying  of   the 
strong  holds  with  the  strange  god  ;  whoso  shall 
acknowledge,"  etc.  ;    Kliefoth,    "  And  he  shall 
act  with  the  defensive  fortress  according  to  the 
mind  of  the  strange  god  ;  whoso  shall  acknowl- 
edge," etc.  ;   Hitzig  and  Kamphausen,  "  And  he 
shall  provide  for  the  defensive  fortresses  t\i\i 
people  of  a  strange  god,  ?'.«.,  heathen  colonists  " 
(the  two  latter  consequently  transform  DS  into 
D5)  ;  [Kcil,  "With  the  help  of  this  god,  who  was 
unknown   to   his   fathers,    he    will    so   proceed 
against  the  strong  fortresses  that  he  will  reward 
with  honor,  might,  and  wealth  those  who  ac- 
knowledge him."] — Whom  he  shall  acknowl- 
edge and  increase  with  glory ;  rather,  ' '  To  him 
who  shall  acknowledge  (them),  he  shall  make  the 
honor  great ;  "  i.e.,  he  shall  confer  great  honor 
on  those  who,  like  himself,  adore  the  god  of  for- 
tresses, and  consequently  make  an  idol  of  for- 
tifications and  war  in  general.     The  persons  in 
view  are  probably  not  the  heathen  .subjects  and 
military  officers  of  the  king,  who  naturally  were 
already   devoted  to  this  martial   god   and  the 
worshiiJ  of  fortresses,  but  primarily  the  Jews 
who  apostatized  to  that  religion,  such  as,  e.g. ,  a 
Jason,  Meuelaus,  and    others  (3   Mace.    iv.   10, 
25;    V.   15). — And   shall  cause   them   to   rule 
(or  •■  be  lords")  among  (the)  many  ;  i.e.,  among 
the  great  mass  of  their  nation.     Fuller,    who 
identifies  the  3''3"in  with  those  noticed  in  v.  33, 
i.e.,  with  the  theocratic  Jews,  probably  goes  too 
far  in  this  ;  but  he  is  doubtless  correct  in  distin- 
"uishing   the   phrase    "set    them   to   be   lords 
miioiKj  mmii/  "  from  "  to  make  them  lords  over 
m(cny."—:And  shall  divide  the  land  for  gain, 
or  "in  reward,"  i.e.,   in  recompense  for  their 
apostasy.     Nothing  definite  is  stated  with  re- 
ference to  a  division  of  lands  among  the  apos- 
tates by  Antiochus  in  the  passages  that  report 
his  briberies  and  promises.  1  Mace.  ii.  18 ;  iii. 
30  et  seq.  ;  but  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that 
he  employed  this  means  also,   and  that  espe- 
cially such   property  as  had   been   confiscated 
from  obstinate  Jews  was  conferred  on  the  apos- 
tates. 

Verses  40-45.  Recapitulation  of  the  weirlike 
Cfireer  e>f  Antiochus  Bpiphanes,  not  distinguish- 
ing between  his  several  campaigns  against 
Egypt,  as  was  the  case  in  v.  22  et  seq.,  but 
merely  noticing  the  general  character  of  his 
attacks  on  that  countrj-.  and  their  unfortunate 
results  upon  Judaja.  The  rather  general  char- 
acter of  this  paragraph,  which  is  analogous  in 
this  respect  to  the  descriptions  of  the  future 
drawn  by  earlier  prophets,  raises  the  expecta- 
tion that  these  ver.ses  will  prove  to  be  especially 
original  and  free  from  interpolating  additions — 
an  expectation  that  will  be  verified  by  the  exe- 
gesis of  the  several  venses.  Influenced  by  the 
words  Tk  ~?r^,  "and  at  the  time  of  the  end," 
which  appeared  to  relate  to  the  final  stages  of 
the  reign  of  Epiph.ines,  although  the  prophet 
probaljly  employed  it  in  the  same  general  sense 


as  in  chap.  viii.  17  (with  reference  to  the  clos- 
ing period  of  the  pre-Messiauic  history  in  gen- 
eral) ;  and  led  astray  to  a  no  less  extent  by  tha 
example  of  Porphyry,  who,  according  to  Jerome 
on  this  place,  discovered  the  description  of  a 
fourth  and  last  Egyptian  campaign  in  this  para- 
graph, which  he  .supposed  to  belong  to  the  yeai 
before   that  in  which  the   reign   of   Autiochua 
closed  (B.C.  165),*  a  majority  of  modern  exposi- 
tors have  also  regarded  these   verses  as  a  con- 
tinuation of  the  historical  narrative,  whose  spe-   . 
cial   object   was   to   describe   the   last   warlike 
operations  of  Epiphanes  against  Egypt,  Phceui- 
cia,  and  Armenia.     The  Maccabtean  books  make 
no  mention  of  these  final  wars  of  Autiochiis, 
but  report  that  he   marched  toward  the   east 
only,  namely,  to  Babylonia,  Elymal's,  and  Per- 
sia, and  that  he  died  in  the  latter  country  (see 
1  Mace.  iii.  37 ;  vi.  1  et  seq.) ;  but  this  circum- 
stance is  explained,  either  by  assuming  that  the 
writer  of  those  books  deaignedly  ig)u>red  the  wars 
m  question,  especially  the  fourth  Egyptian  and 
the  Armenian  campaigns  (Hofmann,  D(  bellia  al 
Aiitiocho  gestis),  or  by  declaring  that  his  repre- 
sentations as  a  whole  are  not  worthy  of  credit, 
and  for  that  reason  giving  the  preference  to  Por- 
phyry's statements  as  reported  by  Jerome   (so 
especially  Fiiller  on  this  passage,  p.  338  et  seq. ). 
The  report  of  Porphyry,  however,  appears  rather 
to  have  originated  in  a  misapprehension  of  the 
paragraph  under  consideration  ;  for  the  remain- 
ing historians  of  the  time,  and  particularly  Livy, 
Polybius,  and  Appian,  are  entirely  ignorant  of  a 
fourth  Egyptian  campaign  of  Epiphanes.  and  the 
credibility  of  the  Maccabsean  books,  especially 
of  the  first,  cannot  be  assailed  upon  the  ground 
of  their  statements  respecting  the  final  actions 
and  the  death   of  Epiphanes,  nor  in  any  other 
respect;  see  Wernsdorf,  Be  fide  Mficeub.,  p.  5S 
ss. ,  and  Wieseler,  Art.   Antiochus  Epipihanes  in 
Herzog's  Real-Encykloji..   I.,  386  et  .seq.     We 
therefore   agree   with   Dereser,  Von  Lengerke, 
Maurer,  Hitzig,  Ewald,  and  Kamphausen,  in  re- 
garding vs.  40-45   as   being   in   fact  a  kind   of 
abbreviating   and   generaUzing   resume    of   the 
contents  of  vs.  33-39  ;  but  we  explain  this  pecu- 
liar feature  by  regarding  that  detailed  narrative 
of  the  militaiy  career  of  Epiphanes,  as  the  pro- 
duct of  the  interi^olating  activity  of  a  pious  Jew 
in  the  Maccabasan  period,  while  we  consider  vs. 
40-45  as  being  a  portion  of  Daniel's  original  pro- 
phecies uttered  during  the  a?ra  of  the  Captivity, 
which  was  left  untouched   upon  the  whole  by 
the  interpolator.!— And  at  the  time  of  the  end 

*  Jerome,  T.  V.,  p.  8,  p.-7a0:  " Et  hmc  Porphyriits  ad 
Antiochum  refert.  quod  mideciirm  anno  regiU  .sui  rm-siia 
contra  sororis  Jilium,  Plolemoium  PliUontet"rem  dimi- 
caverit.  Qui  tiudieitu  venire  Antiochum  congregaverit 
nuilta  populurutn  miUia:  f^ed  Antioc/m^  quasi  tempestus 
ralida  in  <niTtt>us  et  in.  equitibus  et  in  classe  magna  ingres- 
nus  sit  terras  plnriinafi  et  transeundo  nntvej-sa  vestaverit; 
veneritque  ad  terram  inclf/tam,  i.e.,  Juno'am  .  ,  .  .  et 
arceni  munierit  dc^ruinin  murornm  civitatis  et  sic  perrex- 
erit  in  ..E'Jt/ptum.  '— Cf.  farther  the  statements  respecting 
the  result  of  this  experlitimi  to  Eg.vpt,  ami  resiiecting  the 
eonnecteil  expeditions  toward  the  north  and  east,  p.  Til  : 
•'.  .  .  .  Pugnafiv  contra  ..Sgy/ptius  et  Libgas  .^t/tlojiiasqne 
pertramiens  audiet  aibi  ub  A"uilune  el  Oriente  pr^xlia  i:oii- 
citttri,  unde  et  regrejliens  capt  ^radios  resistent^s  et  omnem 
in  litore  l-liienicis  vastnvit  pi'ov.  Klani:  cun/estimqnepergil 
ad  Artaxiam  regem  At  nenttv,  qui  de  Orientis  partibUA 
mnrehititr:  et  Interfectis  pi-'rlmix  de  'Ju.s  exercilu,  panel 
tabeinnculiim  xnnm  in  loco .ipedno.  qui  inter  duo  latissima 
etiui  estjlumina,  Tigrim  et  Eupliratem  (v.  46)." 

t  [The  author's  views  here  have  evidently  bet^  biashe^- 
bv  his  favorite  theory  o(  an  interpolation  of  part  of  this  pr> 


CHAP.  XI.  2^5. 


255 


the  king  of  the  south  shall  push  at  him.    On 

VP.  ris:^,  see  immediately  above.  njrtT^,  "  shall 
push  at,"  accords  fully  with  the  genuine  pro- 
phetic description  of  chap.  viii.  -1.  The  Egyp- 
tian king  clearly  appears  as  the  beginner  of  this 
conflict,  for  he  is  mentioned  before  the  northern 
king.  Consequently,  on  the  assumption  that  a 
fourth  Egyptian  war  is  here  spoken  of,  it  will 
be  necessary  to  hold  that  Ptol.  Physcon  and 
Philometor,  encouriirjed  by  their  alliance  with  the 
Bomann,  had  ventured  to  attack  the  Syrian.  It 
is  hardly  to  be  credited  that  the  Koman  histori- 


phecy.  But  the  whole  prediction  is  consecutive  and  natur- 
ally connected,  without  any  repetition  or  redundancy.  Keil, 
atlmitting  a  primary  reference  of  this  passage  to  Antiochus, 
argues  against  this  supposition  of  a  recapitulation  or  sum- 
mary here.  "  If  thus,  according  to  ver.  .35.  the  tribulation 
with  wh  ich  the  people  of  God  shall  be  visited  by  the  hostile 
king  for  their  purificatioa  shall  last  till  the  time  of  the  end. 
then  the  time  of  the  end  to  which  the  prophecies  of  vers.  40 
-^  ftill  cannot  designate  the  whole  diu^tion  of  the  conduct 
of  this  enemyj  but  only  the  end  of  his  reign  and  of  his  per- 
secutions, in  which  he  perished  (ver.  40).  On  the  contrary, 
the  reference  to  chap.  viii.  17  avails  nothing,  because  there 
also  yp  r.r  has  the  same  meaning  as  here,  i.e.,  it  denotes 
the  termination  of  the  epoch  referred  to,  and  is  there  only 
made  a  more  general  expression  by  means  of  riTD  than 

hera,  where  by  rS^3  and  the    connection    with  ver.  35 

the  «nd  is  more  sharply  defined.  To  this  is  to  be  added 
that  the  contents  of  vers.  40—45  are  irreconcilable  with  the 
Euppo?ition  that  in  thera  is  repeated  in  a  comprehensive 
form  what  has  already  been  said  of  Antiochus.  for  here 
something  new  is  announced,  something  of  which  nothing 
has  been  said  before.  This  even  Maturer  and  Hitzig  have 
not  been  able  to  deny,  but  nave  sought  to  conceal  as  much 
as  possible,— Maurer  by  the  remark  :  ^  Rasa  HcriptureUerum 
ac  ncEvitts  perfracfatas  esse,  extrernnm  vera  maiiuni  operi 
dufuiitse;^  and  Hitzig  by  various  turnings — -as  it  seems," 
*  but  is  not  precisely  acknowledged,"  '  the  fact  is  nowhere 
else  communicated''  —  which  are  obviously  mere  make- 
Bhifts.""  Stuart  thus  defends  the  belief  in  another  and  final 
campaign  of  -\ntiochus :  "Lengerke  as.erts  the  entire  nn- 
probability  of  another  and  fourth  invasion  of  Egypt  and 
Palest.ue,  on  the  ground  that  .\ntiochus  was  too  weak  and 
too  poor  to  collect  forces  enough  to  carr>'  on  such  a  war 
with  success.  But  1  Mace.  i.  27  seq.  shows  us  that  after 
Antiochus  had  heard  of  the  notable  defeat  by  Judas  of  his 
general  Seron,  '  he  was  enraged,  and  gathered  together  all 
the  forces  of  liis  kingdom,  TrapcfloAiji'  itr\vp^v  <7i^o5pa,  an 
excee*lingly  great  encfimpiaeut.^  These  he  paid  profusely, 
while  in  an  attitude  of  preparation  f.jr  active  service,  and 
thus  e.\h:iusted  his  treasury.  1  Mace.  i.  28,  29.  To  Lysias, 
his  general,  he  left  one- half  of  his  troops  (1  Mace.  i.  34), 
which  amounted  to  47,000  (v.  3!*).  with  orders  to  subdue  and 
partition  out  Palestine  (vs.  35.  30t.  H'ertt,  then,  Antiochus 
was  not.  at  that  time.  It  is  indeed  true  that  neither  .\ppian, 
nor  Polybius,  nor  Justin,  nor  Livy.  nor  Josephus  have  given 
us  any  particulars  about  this  latest  war  of  Antiochus ;  but 
who  that  has  read  their  Syrian  histories  does  not  know  that 
mere  summaries  scraps,  and  fra-.nnent3  are  all  that  remain 
of  these  writers  in  respect  to  Antiochus  ?  Josephus  depends 
on  1  Mace.  ;  and  this  is  mainly  confined  to  the  e-xploits  of 
Judas  and  his  brethren.  Rosenmiiller  very  appositely  re- 
marks :  *'  Varemua  omntiio  inC€crr<t  aliqua  et  continua  de 
rebus  Antiocfd  nan'atione,  qiuE  a  su(e  (zuui«  scrtptore  ali- 
quo  fide  digno  Uteris  sii  mandat:  The  argumentum  a 
Kitentio,  sptcially  in  respect  to  ancient  hisWfry.  is  far  from 
being  cogent  and  satisfactory.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
accuracy  of  the  statements  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  respecting 
the  domain  of  Ale,\ander"s  successors,  is  on  all  hands  ad- 
mitted in  other  cases.  Here  it  has  narrated  the  events  of 
an  expedition,  in  vs.  40-4.3.  with  its  usual  minuteness,  and 
Rliparently  in  good  order.  Why  should  this  testimony  be 
lejected  ?  Nor  does  it  stand  alone.  Jerome  refers  to  Por- 
phyrv-,  who  wrote  against  the  book  of  Daniel,  as  paying  with 
respect  t.3  vs.  40-J3.  that  they  relate  to  the  last  war  of 
Antiochus.  near  the  close  of  his  life.  .  .  .  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered that  Jerome  does  not  s.iy  a  word  to  contradict  this 
statement,  although  it  made  for  his  favorite  object  to  do  so 
if  he  could,  inasmuch  as  he  might  then  refer  the  pass.ige  to 
his  favorite  Anlickrist.  I  do  n^it  see  why  the  testimony  of 
the  book  before  us,  the  full  confirmation  of  it  by  PorphjTy, 
and  the  apparent  consenting  attitude  of  Jerome,  do  not 
place  the  matter  liefore  us  fairly  out  of  the  reach  of  destruc- 
tive criticii'B.'"'] 


ans,  and  especially  Livy,  should  have  been  unin- 
formed with  regard  to  such  a  war,  w.aged  by 
one  ally  against  another.* — And  he  shall  enter 
into  the  countrie.s,  i.e.,  into  the  countries  ad- 
joining to  Egypt  through  which  his  march  against 
the  latter  kingdom  would  lead  him,  hence,  into 
Coele-Syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Palestine.  —  And 
shall  overflo"w  (or  ""ilow  along")  and  pass 
(or  "surge")  over.  The  phrase  employed 
in  V.  10,  with  reference  to  the  war  of  Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes  against  Ptolemy  Philopater, 
is  entirely  similar. — Verse  41.  He  shall  enter 
also — rathei.  "and  he  shall  enter" — into  the 
glorious  land,  and  many  countries  shall  be 
overthro"Hrn  ;  rather,  ' "  and  many  shall  be  caused 
to  fall."  The  description  is  scarcely  as  concrete 
as  the  parallel  in  chap.  viii.  9-11,  and  m.ay  there- 
fore be  an  original  prophecy  with  equal  proba- 
bility. The  case  differs  in  vs.  28,  31  et  seq. 
The  ■ '  many  ' '  who  shall  be  caused  to  fall  by  the 
northern  king  are  probably  countries  or  nations, 
as  appears  clearly  from  b,  and  as  the  feiu,  m3T 
likewise  indicates  (namely,  ""^".^"55),  That  plu- 
ral is  consequently  not  to  be  pointed  msi.,  "  ten 
thousands  "  (Psa.  xci.  7l,  nor  to  be  translated, 
with  Ewald,  by  "  rabbins,  teachers  of  high 
grade,"  and  that  interpretation  to  be  taken  as 
an  evidence  of  the  later  composition  of  the  book. 
— But  these  shall  escape  out  of  his  hand, 
(even)  Edom  and  Moab  and  the  chief  (or  "'  ker- 
nel") of  the  children  of  Ammon.  ""^S  r"'l"S~ 
11S5,  properly,  the  principal  power,  the  "first- 
lings of  the  power  "  of  the  children  of  Ammon 
(cf.  Num.  xxiv.  20  ;  Jer.  xlix.  85 ;  Am  vi.  1 ), 
which  probably  relates  to  Rabbah,  their  chief 
city,  and  the  principal  seat  of  their  power.  The 
entire  prophecy  before  us  relative  to  the  neigh- 
bors of  Israel  does  not  bear  the  look  of  a  nitic. 
ex  eoentii  ;  for  although  the  Maccab^an  book 
(1  Mace.  iv.  61  ;  v.  8-S)  notices  the  assistance 
rendered  to  Epiphanes  by  the  Edomites  and  .Am- 
monites against  the  Jews,  the  mention  of  the 
Moabites  in  this  pLace  is  so  much  the  more 
remarkable,  as  that  nation  is  never  mentioned 
after  the  captivity  as  maintaining  an  independ- 
ent existence  (Ezra  ix.  1  and  Xeh.  xiii.  1  afford 
no  proof  to  contr-tdict  this  statement,  since  the 
Moabites  are  not  referred  to  in  those  passages 
from  a  historical  point  of  view,  but  dogmati- 
calU",  with  reference  to  the  passage  in  the  law, 
Deut.  xxiii.  3),  and  since  the  name  of  the  Moa- 
bites had  already  been  lost  in  the  more  conrpre- 
hensive  one  of  Arabians  in  the  Maccabaian  age. 
It  is  not  strange,  on  the  other  hand,  that  a  pro- 
phet of  the  time  immediately  subsequent  to  the 
Captivit.y  should  adduce  the  nations  of  Edom, 
Moab,  and  Ammon  as  leading  representatives  of 
tribal  hostility  to  the  theocracy, — not  remark- 
able in  the  least ;  cf.  the  older  prophetic  paral- 
lels. Psa.  X.  10  ;  Isa.  xi.  U  ;  xxv.  10,  1-5.  16  ; 
Zeph.  ii.  8;  Jer.  xliii. ;  xhx.  l-(>;  Ezek.  xxv. 
1-14 ;  xxi.  20,  28,  etc.  Kranichfeld  remarka 
correctly:  "The  Edomites,  like  the  Moabites 
and  Ammonites,  showed  themselves  the  most 
persistent  allies  of  the  oppressors  of  Israel  among 


•  [The  inconclusiveness  of  this  reasoning  is  evitlent.  foi 
as  the  Romans  themselves  were  not  directly  involved  in  tbij 
last  campaign,  a  Roman  histor-an  may  well  hae  heca 
isnorant  or  indifferent  respecting  it,] 


256 


THE  PEOPHET  DANIEL. 


all  its  neighboring  relatives ;  and  when  the  Chal- 
dsean  catastrophe  broke  in  upon  Judah,  they 
proved  themselveR  her  most  bitter  enemies. 
Fi-om  that  period,  the  complaint  against  this 
treacherous  nation,  so  regardless  of  fraternal 
ties,  is  poured  out  more  persistently,  and  the  cry 
for  revenge  upon  it  is  repeated  more  urgently, 
than  against  Babylon  itself ;  of.  Obadiah  ;  Jer. 
xlix.  7-32;  Lam.  iv.  21,  22;  Ezek.  xxv.  12-14; 
XXXV.  ;  xxxvi.  5  ;  Psa.  cxxxvii.  7  et  seq.  ;  Mai. 
i.  1-3.  Although  Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon,  of 
all  others,  were  connected  with  Israel  by  ties  of 
relationship,  and  therefore  were  bound  to  main- 
tain cordial  relations  with  it  in  the  very  nature 
of  their  connection,  it  is  precisely  these  nations, 
the  unnatural  oppressors  of  Israel,  that  enter 
into  the  conception  of  every  theocrat,  and  espe- 
ciallj-  of  the  prophets,  as  the  historical  represen- 
tatives of  all  hostility  against  the  theocracy; 
and  as  their  subjugation  revives  the  Messianic 
hopes  (Psa.  xl.  10;  Isa.  xi.  14  ;  xxv.  10),  so  the 
picture  of  the  bloody  humiliation  of  Edom  is 
occasionally  introduced  to  represent  the  Messi- 
anic universal  triumph  in  Isa.  Ixiii.  1-6,"  etc. — 
Verse  42.  He  shall  stretch  forth  his  hand  also 
upon  the  countries,  i.e..  upon  the  aggregate  of 
the  southern  countries  generally  ;  of.  v.  41  a,  to 
which  the  words  before  us  are  related  as  a  gen- 
eralizing repetition.  [?] — And  the  land  of  Eg3rpt 
shsdl  not  escape.*  "B^ibcb  "'■'!'"  S*i,  proper- 
ly, "  shall  not  be  among  the  escaped  ones ;  "  cf. 
Joel  ii.  3 ;  Jer.  1.  29  ;  3  Chron.  xx.  24  ;  Ezra  ix. 
14. — Verse  43.  And  he  shall  have  power  over 
the  treasures  of  gold  and  of  silver,  and  over 
all  the  precious  things  of  Egypt.  Cf.  supra,  v. 
2S.  where  the  great  booty  was  mentioned  which 
Autiochus  earned  away  on  his  return  from  the 
second  Egyptian  campaign,  while  the  statement 
here  is  very  general  in  its  character,  and  notices 
the  confiscation  of  treasures  in  Egypt  once  for 
all. — And  the  Libyans  and  the  Ethiopians 
shall  be  at  his  steps^  as  enforced  auxiliaries, 
who  were  compelled  to  follow  the  victorious 
king  of  the  north,  as  was  Egypt  in  former  times 
(cf.  Ezek.  XXX.  .5;  Jer.  xlvi.  9).  The  fact  that 
this  feature  is  recorded  in  no  other  authorities 
is  an  additional  evidence  for  the  genuine  charac- 
ter of  this  prophecy  (agarmst  IIitzig).f  Concern- 
ing "'"5^'33,  "in  his  following  or  train,"  cf. 
the  analogous  1^b3i_2,  in  Judg.  iv.  10  ;  v.  15 ; 
also  Ex.  xi.  8. — Verse  44.  But  tidings  ("ru- 
mors") out  of  the  east  and  out  of  the  north 
shall  trouble  (or  "alarm")  him;  therefore  he 
shall  go  forth  with  great  fury,  to  destroy  and 
utterly  to  make  away  many.  The  masculine 
plural  "~"-i7?1  is  employed  here,  "in  view  of 
the  omission  from  the  general  idea  of  the  state- 
ment, of  the  subject  which  originates  the  rumors." 
Cf.  the  analogous  case  in  chap.  ii.  33.  The 
"  alarming  rumors  out  of  the  east  and  north  " 
may.  in  fact,  be  referred  to  the  expedition  which 
Antiochus  undertook  shortly  before  he  died 
(B  C.  IGG,  or  147  aer.  Sel. — see  1  Mace.  iii.  37), 
against  the  Parthians  under  Arsaces  and  against 


*  [N'n  one  can  fail  to  see  how  inept  and  trivial  this  state- 
ment winild  be  if  a  mere  recapitulation  of  what  had  been 
oefore  declared  so  much  more  fiilly  and  explicitly.] 

t  [But  a  later  interpolator  would  not  have  failed  to  ."seize 
upon  ?o  remarkable  a  point,  and  would  surely  have  incor- 
porated it  into  his  part,  and  ev«ii  enlarged  upon  it  from  the  j 
hlfltorj  at  hia  command.] 


the  Armenians  under  Artaxias,  and  which  re- 
sulted in  at  least  the  subjugation  and  capture  of 
the  Armenian  king  (see  Tacitus,  Hist. ,  v.  8  ; 
Appian,  Si/r.  4.5.  4()).  This  thought  is  at  any 
rate  less  forced  than  that  which  refers  the  words 
to  the  brutal  treatment  accorded  to  Jerusalem, 
which  was  mentioned  in  v.  30  et  seq.,  and  also 
to  the  alleged  rebellion  of  the  Aradians  in  Phos- 
nicia,  which  is  mentioned  only  by  Porphyry  in 
the  passage  cited  by  Jerome  (see  note  above ; 
against  Hitzig).  It  is,  however,  by  no  meana 
necessary  to  regard  this  passage  as  a  vatic,  ex 
eve.ntu  ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  exceedingly  possi- 
ble that  the  remarkable  correspondence  between 
its  statements  and  the  historical  fact  that  Anti  • 
ochus  Epiphanes  was  recalled  from  his  warlike 
operations  in  the  south  by  those  insurrections  in 
the  north  and  east,  became  the  very  occasion 
which  led  the  Maccabaean  interpolator  to  intro- 
duce into  the  preceding  verses  (22-39)  allusions, 
still  more  specific  in  character,  to  the  history  of 
the  wars  of  the  antitheistic  tyrant,  with  a  view 
to  represent  his  entire  career  as  having  been 
foretold  by  Daniel  in  all  its  successive  stages.  * — 
Verse  45.  And  he  shall  plant  the  tabernacles 
of  his  palace  f  between  the  seas  in  the  glori- 
ous holy  mountain ;  rather,  ' '  between  seas  and 
the  mountain  of  the  holy  ornament."  "^f 
"■i^lP""'?^,  the  "mount  of  the  holy  ornament," 
certainly  denotes  Mount  Zion,  the  mount  on 
which  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  was  erected  (cf. 
i;;;,  chap.  viii.  9,  and  n;::n  f  "IH.  ^s.  16,  41, 
as  designations  of  the  holy  land) ;  and  the  plural 
D""3']  must  be  regarded,  with  Hitzig,  Kranich- 
feld,  etc. ,  and  with  equal  certainty,  either  as  a 
poetical  designation  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea 
(cf.  Job  vi.  3  ;  Ecclus  i.  3),  or,  with  Venema, 
Fuller,  and  others,  as  denoting  the  two  seas  be- 
tween which  mount  Zion  is  situated — the  Dead 
Sea  and  the  Mediterranean,  The  latter  view, 
on  which  the  plural  is  employed  for  the  dual,  is 
the  best  recommended,  on  accovmt  of  the  absence 
of  the  article  from  3^^"^.  There  is  certainly  no 
reference  to  any  locality  outside  of  the  holy 
land,  as  Porphyry,  1.  c. ,  held,  referring  the  two 
"  seas "  to  the  rivers  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  and 
misunderstanding  the  choice  poetical  expression 
■inesf;  ^bns,  "  tents  of  his  palace  "  (cf.  the  cor- 
responding Syr.  word  for  11BS,  "  palace,"  and 
also  Jer.  xliii.  10,  Targ.),  to  the  extent  of  as- 
suming a  place  between  those  rivers,  and  bear- 
ing the  name  of  Apedno,  as  the  resting-place  of 
Antiochus  while  contending  against  the  Armeni- 
ans and  Parthians ;  or,  as  Dereser  and  Haver- 
nick  have  interpreted  it  in  modem  times,  ren- 


*  [On  the  contrary,  had  these  clauses  been  introduced  by 
such  an  interpolator,  he  would  surely  have  been  more 
definite  in  his  allusions.] 

t  ["  5l33  of  planting  a  tent,  only  here  used  instead  of 

the  usual  nt3I.   to  spread  out,  to  set  up,  probably  with 

reference  to  the  great  palace-like  tent  of  the  Oriental  ruler, 
whose  poles  must  be  struck  very  deep  into  the  earth.  C£ 
the  description  of  the  tent  of  Alexander  the  Great,  which 
was  erected  after  the  Oriental  type,  in  Polyien  ,  Strate;)., 
IV.  3,  '24,  and  of  the  tent  of  Nadir-Shah,  in  Roseumiillcr,  J. 
u.  N.  MorgeiLl.,  IV.,  p.  .%4/.  These  tent-,  were  surrounded 
by  a  multitude  of  smaller  touts  fur  the  .guards  and  servants, 
a  circumstance  which  explains  the  use  of  the  pliixaL" — 
KeU.\ 


CHAP.  XI.  2-«. 


257 


dermg  i'l??  correctly,  but  making  the  "  mount 
of  the  holy  ornament"  to  designate  the  "  mount 
of  the  sanctuary  of  Xantea,"  which  lies  between 
the  Persian  Gulf  and  the  Caspian  Sea,  and  near 
which  they  believe  Antiochus  to  have  died, — a 
view  which  Hitzig  justly  characterizes  as  ''  a 
monstrosity,"  and  which  is  equally  unfortunate 
in  iuteqjreting  either  — ~p""?^  "l~  or  -'^■2^. — 
But  he  shall  come  to  his  end,  and  none  shall 
help  him.  The  death  of  Antiochus  did  not  take 
place  in  Juda?a  itself,  nor  did  it  occur  immedi- 
ately after  his  final  sojourn  in  that  country, 
when  his  camp  was  in  the  vicinity  of  Jerusalem 
(having  returned  from  the  third  Egyptian  war 
in  B.C.  168. — On  the  location  of  his  camp, 
of.  2  Mace.  V.  24  with  1  Mace.  i.  29  et  seq.),but 
rather  from  two  to  three  years  later,  in  coimec- 
tion  with  the  campaign  against  the  Parthians 
and  Armenians,  and  in  the  Persian  town  of 
Tabaj  (luJai).  which  Polyb.,  XXXI.  11,  and 
Porphyry,  in  Jerome  on  this  passage,  agree  in 
representing  as  the  place  of  his  decease  ;  cf.  in 
addition  1  Mace.  vi.  4,  8.*  So  sudden  a  transi- 
tion from  the  scene  of  the  over-confident  op- 
pressor's sojourn  in  the  holy  land  to  that  of  his 
irretrievable  destruction,  which  did  not  take 
place  until  after  a  considerable  interval,  is  a 
decided  proof  of  the  genuine  prophetic  character 
of  this  passage,  f  A  testimony  of  no  less  weight 
is  found  in  the  analogy  of  the  peculiar  expres- 
sion ~y  i<~^  ''ZJ^  to  the  former  descriptions  in 
chap.  viii.  2.5  ;  ix  26,  and  in  the  poetic,  coloring 
of  the  entire  representation.  As  a  characteristic 
feature  in  the  latter  regard,  we  notice  the  words 
lb  -Tj  ys-  (cf.  the  shorter  ib  T^»"],  chap.  ix. 
20).  which  serve  as  a  transition  to  chap.  xii.  1-S, 
and  form  an  expression  that  refers  in  very  gen- 
eral terms  to  the  irretrievable  and  irrevocable 
character  of  his  destruction.  It  would  be  use- 
less to  look  for  an  indication  of  insanity  (Polyb., 
I.  c. )  or  of  painful  disease  (3  Mace.  ix.  5,  9,  28), 
as  having  preceded  the  death  of  Epiphanes,  in 
these  words. 

ETHICO-FUND.\MENTAT,  PRINCIPLES  RELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLO- 
GETICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILKTICAL  SUG- 
GESTIONS. 

1.  Our  exegetical  examination  has  resulted  in 
leading  us  to  regard  the  opening  and  dosing 
vernes  of  the  section  as  having  originated  with 
Daniel,  or  more  particularly,   those  portions  of 


*  [Stuart  thus  explains  this  seeming  discrepancy  :  "  But 
why  is  the  mentiun  of  Antiochus's  encampment  between 
the  ilediterranoau  and  Jerusalem  here  brought  again  to 
view,  after  the  speaker  hai  already  followed  him  to  the 
East  ?  For  the  purpose  of  inipyeHsion^  I  should  say,  rather 
than  from  any  necessity  of  the  case.  *  Look  at  the  con- 
trast" ^the  speaker  would  seem  to  s.iy) ;  ^  now  Antiochus 
encamps  in  his  lofty  tent  like  a  palace,  meditating  the  over- 
throw of  the  holy  city  and  temple  ;  next  we  see  him  in  dis- 
grace, and  even  in  the  agonies  of  death,  stricken  by  an 
Invisible  and  irresistible  hand.'  The  interest  with  which  a 
Hebn^w  would  survey  this  picture  may  be  imagined,  but 
canuot  well  be  de3Cril>ed."] 

t  [This  remark  uf  the  author  is  doubtless  by  way  of  con- 
trast with  the  more  definite  and  historically  correct  utter- 
ances of  the  pre-'iuled  interpolation  preceding;  aa  if  an 
ine.xact — not  to  Siiy  untrue — prediction  were  a  sure  mark 
fi£  authenticity  in  a  prophet  I]  . 

17 


the  prophecy  which  relate  to  the  development 
of  the  Persian  empire  and  to  the  first  begin- 
nings of  the  Javanic  world-power  (vs.  2^),  to- 
gether with  those  that  refer  to  the  Old- Test, 
antichrist  as  the  last  representative  of  the  Grae 
cian  world-kingdom  (vs.  40—4.5) ;  while  we  saw 
cause  to  regard  the  portion  intervening  between 
the  two  just  indicated  (vs.  .5-39)  as  being  com 
posed  of  both  genuine  and  interpolated  e'.e 
ments.  It  is  impossible  to  assert  that  the  inter 
mediate  section  is  spurious  throughout,  because 
it  affords  many  traces  of  original  prophr.cy, 
which  may  be  recognized  by  the  coraparativft 
discrepancy  of  their  statements  with  the  cor- 
responding facts  in  the  history  of  the  Seleuoidaa 
and  the  Lagid^  (see,  e.g.^  vs.  14,  19,  20,  34,  39). 
By  far  the  larger  portion,  however,  seems  to 
have  been  inserted  by  a  later  hand,  since  the 
parallels  found  in  former  descriptioES  of  the 
future,  viz,  :  chap.  vii.  24,  and  ^nii.  9, — passages 
which  likewise  refer  to  the  period  intervening 
between  Alexander  the  Great  and  /jitiochus 
Epiphanes, — are  exceeded  by  it  to  an  almost  in- 
credible degree  in  regard  to  the  specific  charac- 
ter of  its  predicted  details."  It  follows  the 
succession  of  the  Seleucid  monarohe  and  their 
conflicts  with  the  Ptolemies  with  such  conscien- 
tious accuracy,  that  it  may  almofl  be  considered 
an  attempt  to  demonstrate  t.^e  ideal  tenfold 
number  of  the  horns  of  the  fourth  beast  in 
chap.  vii.  24,  in  the  particulars  of  history.  This, 
however,  becomes  improbable  from  the  circum- 
stance that  the  number  of  the  Syrian  kings  who 
are  mentioned  is  by  no  means  exactly  ten,  but 
that,  on  the  contrary,  their  succession  is  fol- 
lowed in  a  decidedly  imperfect  manner,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  overlooking  of  Antiochus  Soter 
(see  on  v.  0),  and  from  the  confused  interchange 
of  the  earliest  kings  in  general  (see  on  vs.  5-9), 
We  observed  in  a  former  paragraph  (Eth.  -fund, 
principles  on  chap.  vii.  No.  3,  a)  that  it  could 
not  be  proven  that  the  writer  of  this  book  as- 
signs exactly  ten  kings  to  the  period  from  Alex- 
ander the  Great  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  or 
that  he  was  acquainted  with  precisely /««)•  kin^ 
of  Persia,  and  no  more  (see  on  chap.  xi.  2).  The 
arrangement  of  the  series  of  Seleucid  kings  ac- 
cording to  a  numerically  symbolic  plan,  can  in 
nowise  be  asserted,  whether  the  chapter  before 
us  be  regarded  as  the  genuine  production  of 
Daniel  throughout,  or  as  enriched  [?J  bj'  later 
additions  of  the  Maccabaean  age.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  can  be  no  question  that  it  was  tlie 
design  of  the  originator  of  this  exact  description 
of  the  history  of  the  Seleucidas  and  the  Lagidaj, 
whether  Daniel  himself  or  an  inspired  ['i\  readel 
of  his  book  in  the  Maccabajan  period  were  that 
writer,  to  demonstrate  that  the  MancabEean  pe- 
riod, and  it  alone,  formed  the  point  in  which 
the  entire  series  of  prophecies  in  the  book  arc 
centred,  and  consequently  ihat  it  constituted 
the  immediate  preparation  for  the  Me.ssianio 
period  of  salvation.  It  became  necessary,  '"on 
the    beginning   of    the    predicted    unexampled 


*  [We  dismiss  this  theory  of  trte  author  by  once  mor^ 
calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  these  so-called  interpola- 
tions are  so  intimately  blended  as  component  parts  with  thfl 
rest  of  the  prophecy  in  which  they  are  imbedded,  that  om 
author  does  not  attempt  to  eliminate  them,  or  even  dis 
tinctly  designate  theui.  To  do  so  \s-onld  result  in  enervat- 
ing and  dislocating  the  Wiiole.  The  authenticity  of  thi 
entire  passage  must  stand  or  fall  together.) 


258 


THE  PROPHET  D.iNIEL 


trial,  to  enable  the  Jewish  nation  to  trace,  step 
by  step,  that  it  was  by  the  counsel  of  God  that 
it  should  begin  under  precisely  those  circum- 
stances, and  in  precisely  that  juncture  of  the 
progress  of  history"  (Delitzsch).  It  was  neces- 
sary ■■  to  connect  the  advent  of  the  post-Mace- 
donian tyrant  with  the  time  of  Daniel  by  so 
continuous  a  chain  of  the  most  particular  events, 
that  it  would  be  erident  that  no  hiatus  could 
intervene  between  the  time  of  D,aniel  and  that 
tyrant,  in  -which  the  Messiah  might  appear  " 
(Ebrard;  see  supra  on  v.  5).  Cf.  also  Fiiller, 
pp.  3G3,  et.  seq.,  3G8. 

2.   The  fundamental    ethical   and   Messianic 
principle  of  the  section  coincides  substantially 
^vith  its  aim,  as  it  was  pointed  out  in  the  pre- 
ceding paragraph,  and  as  we  are  compelled  to 
formulate   it   in   common  with  nearly  all   the 
orthodox  expositors  of  recent  times,  despite  our 
doubts  concerning  its  unimpaired  genuineness. 
God  will  not  desert  his  people  in  the  changing 
fortunes  of  the  world,  or  amid  the  tempestuous 
thronging  of  the  u.ations  and  the  tumults  of  the 
wars   incited   Vjy   the   monarchs   of   the   earth. 
Even  though  they  be  pressed  during  centuries 
between  mighty  contending  empires  as  between 
two   millstones,    and    be   unable   in   their   own 
power  to  prevent  the  raging  of  such  foes,  God 
will   not   permit  them   to  be  either  ground  or 
crushed.     He  does  not  permit  the  chosen  people 
of  His  heritage  to  be  overwhelmed,  even  though 
the  oppressor's  power  should  reach  its  highest 
stage,    and  though   to  his  violent  attempts   to 
suppress  that  people  by  force  should  be  added 
the  most  flattering  arts  of  dissimulation  and  the 
most  dangerous  spiritual  trials  (cf.  v.  31  et  seq. ). 
Indeed,  it  is  precisely  when  the  need  is  highest, 
that  He  comes  nighest  with  His  aid  and  deliv- 
erance ;  precisely  when  to  human  wisdom  every 
prospect  of  rescue  has  been  lost,  does  the  judg- 
ment of   God   break   in  on   the   oppressor  and 
snatch  him  away  to  irretrievable   ruin — "  and 
there  is  none  to  help  him"  (v.  45).     The  par- 
ticularizing description  of  the  tedious  conflicts 
between  the  kingdoms  of  the  north  and  south 
is  evidently  designed  to  illustrate  these  truths, 
which  are  closely   connected  with   the   funda- 
mental thought  of   chap.    viii.       These   truths 
would  still  constitute  the  ethical  kernel  of  this 
section,  even  if  the  portion  that  is  probably  in- 
terpoLated,  vs.  5-3'J  (where  the  prophecy  becomes 
transformed  into  actual  history),  were  conceived 
of  as  being  vhuUy  expunged  ;   but  they  form  its 
leading  thought  in  a  more  obvious  sense,  when 
it  is  remembered  that  that  portion  is  at  least 
largely  composed  of  genuine  prophecies  relating 
to  the  time  between  Alexander  and  Antiochus 
Epiphanes.     It  must  accordingly  be  admitted, 
even  on  the  assumption  of  the  partially  inter- 
polated character  of  the  section  which  we  have 
adopted,    that  the   prophecy  enters  upon  the 
course  of  history  from  the  Persian  £era  to  the 
Asmonacan  period  with  an  unusual  fulness  of 
detail,  and  does  this  because  it  accorded  with 
the  Divine  purpose  to  afford  the  suffering  con- 
fessors of  the  latter  epoch  a  strong  certainty 
that  their  artiictions  constituted  the  woes,  the 
immediate  precursors  of  the  Measianic  aera  of 
deliverance.     To  the  extraordinary  trials  of  the 
Maccabsean  age,   the   wise   providence  of   God 
designed   to   oppose   a  means   of   comfort  and 
strength  possessing  extraordinary  power,  in  this 


unusually  specific  portion  of  Daniel's  prophe- 
cies.      "  If   that   affliction   was   unique   in   it« 
kind,  is  it  wonderful  that  the  people  was  armed 
against  it,  .and  strengthened  to  endure  it,  by 
means  that  are  likewise  unique  in  their  kind  ?  .  .  . 
The  war  which  Antiochus  waged  against  Israel 
was  not  like  other  wars.     He  aimed  to  destroy 
its  religion ;    and  therefore  this  war  is  repre- 
sented as  a  contest  against  God  and  His  service. 
In  such  a  war  Israel  stood  alone  and  without 
allies,  in  the  resistance  it  opposed  to  the  pow- 
erful king  .and  his  armies.     In  proportion  as  it 
was  deprived  of  ordinary  means  of  power  and 
resistance,    and   was   confined   to   the   exercise 
of  confidence  in  the  aid  of  its  God,  in  that  pro- 
portion it  was  necessary  to  strengthen  its  trust ; 
and  this  was  accomplished   by  means  of   this 
vmique   detailed   prophetic   description   of   the 
tribulation  .and  the  history  which  should  pre- 
cede it"  (Fiiller,  p.  303;  cf.  Hofmann,  Wcissag. 
n.    Erf.,    I.    313). — We  have  assumed  that  a 
pious  [!]  theocratic  investigator  of   the   Scrip- 
tures in  that  period  of  trial,  affected  and  sur- 
prised by  the  marvellously  exact  correspondence 
between  the  prophecy  and  the  history  of  hia 
time,  sought  to  give  a  still  more  direct  form  to 
that  correspondence,   and   to  remove   the   last 
remains  of  apparent  discrepancy  between  the 
prediction  and  the  recent  historical  past,  by  in- 
serting into  the  prophetic  text  a  series  of  reiti- 
cinia  ex  etentu  ;  but  this  can  no  more  destroy 
the  incomparable  value  and  the  inspired  charac- 
ter of  the  prophecy  before   us,   than,   for   in- 
stance,  the   interpolations   perpetrated  on   the 
somewhat  analogous   predictions  of   the  abbot 
Joachim  of   Floris  (f  1202)   by  later  mystical 
observers  of  the  history  of  the  Middle  Ages,  for 
the  purpose  of  adapting  them  as  accurately  as 
possible  to  the  facts  in  which  they  were  realized, 
can  throw  doubt  upon  the  high  prophetic  en- 
dowment of  that  personage    [?],   or  can  bring 
into  question  the  occurrence  of  really  genuine 
prophecies  in  his  writings  (cf.  Neander,  Kirchen- 
gesch.,  vol.   II.,  p.  451  et  seq.  ;  Gieseler.  II.  2, 
p.  354,  No.  8  ;  35(i,  No.  9).     The  interpolating 
activity  of  his  later  admirers  did  not  destroy 
the  fame  as  a  genuine  prophet  of  that  celebrated 
apocalyptist  of  the  twelfth  century,  who,  as  is 
well  known,  foretold  the  rise  of  two  new  orders, 
a  preaching  order  and  a  contemplative  order, 
during  the  period  immediately  subsequent  to  his 
own,  and  by  that  very  means  gave  occasion  to  the 
more  strict  (or  spiritual)  party  among  the  Fitm- 
ciscans  in  the  thirteenth  century  to   construct 
as   perfect  a  concordance  as  was   possible  be- 
tween his  predictions  and   the  history  of   the 
origin  of  their  own  order  and  that  of  the  Do- 
minicans;  nor  was  his  contemporary,  S.  Hilde- 
gard  (t  1107),   who  predicted  the  Reformation 
and  the  order  of  the  Jesuits  (Epist.,  p.  160;   cf. 
Neander,  itnil.,  p.  448  et  seq.)  deprived  of  her 
fame  as  a  richly  endowed  prophetess  [?] ,  by  the 
interpolated    additions   which    were    doubtless 
made  to  her  prophecies  at  a  later  period.*    With 
equal,  and  stUl  greater  truthfulness,  it  may  be 
asserted  th.at  the  prophetic  and  inspired  charac- 
ter of  this  book  is  not  materially  injared,  in  any 

•  The  RevehUloiiei!  of  S.  Brirlget  (  t  K'iS  I  miplit  also  be 
nilduced  as  an  example  in  point  :  likewise  the  t^ttatraiiui  of 
Nostradamus  (t  ISfilil.  etc.  [The  Rationalistic  tone  of 
these  comparisons  of  ft  book  of  Holy  Writ  with  pseudo-apoo- 
ryphal  pretondera  of  modern  tir  les,  is  palpable.] 


CHAP.  XI.  2^45. 


259 


way  whatever,  by  the  opinion  that  the  present 
section  has  received  certain  adaptations  and 
particularizing  additions  from  a  later  hand,  and 
that  by  this  opinion,  c.f/.,  its  accurate  references 
to  the  expedition  of  Ptol.  Evergetes  for  con- 
quest (vs.  7,  8),  to  the  warlike  operations  of 
Antiochus  Magnus  (vs.  11-19).  and  to  the  three 
E^'yptian  campaigns  of  Epiphanes  (vs.  22-30) 
are  most  readily  explained." 

3.  This  chapter  apparently  presents  but  few 
points,  or  none  at  all,  for  practical  or  homiletical 
treatment,  as  it  is  composed  almost  exclusively 
of  prophetic  descriptions  of  special  historical 
events.  Even  the  thought  just  presented,  that 
the  wonderful  adaptation  of  the  prediction  to 
particular  events,  was  conditioned  upon  the  ex- 
traordinary .severity  of  the  Maccabsan  suffer- 
ings and  oppressions,  seems  to  afford  but  little 
opportunity  for  practical  and  edifying  applica- 
tion. Instead  of  emphasizing  that  idea  in  a 
one-sided  manner,  it  will  be  better  to  seize  on 
the  ethical  centre  of  the  entire  prophetic  his- 
torical picture,  or.  in  other  words,  on  the  truth 
that  God  iriU  not  desert  His  people  iind  His  holy 
covenant  in  any  of  the  storms  and  changing 
events  of  the  history  of  the  nati/jns,  but  tltat  He 
inll  send  deliverance  in  the  precite  moment  ichen 
their  need  has  reached  itji  highest  point — and  to 
make  this  the  starting-point  and  principal  ob- 
ject of  study.  The  practical  fundamental 
thought  of  the  section  is  consequently  the  same 
in  substance  as  that  contained  in  Psa.  xlvi.  2-6  : 
"  God  is  our  refuge  and  strength,  a  very  present 
help  in  trouble.  Therefore  will  we  not  fear 
though  the  earth  be  removed,  and  though  the 
mountains  be  carried  into  the  midst  of  the  sea  ; 
though  the  waters  thereof  roar  and  be  troubled, 
though  the  mountains  shake  with  the  swelling 
thereof.  Still  the  city  of  God  shall  be  glad 
with  its  fountain  [so  Luther],  where  are  the 
holy  tabernacles  of  the  Most  High.  God  is  in 
the  midst  of  her;  she  shaU  not  be  moved  ;  God 
shall  help  her,  and  that  right  early." — The  fun- 
damental thought,  reduced  to  a  briefer  form, 
may  also  be  expressed  as  follows :  The  Lord 
causes  the  mighty  millstones  (the  northern  and 
southern  kingdoms)  between  which  the  people 
of  his  heritage  is  placed  like  an  insignificant 
and  impotent  grain  of  com,  to  crush  each  other 
rather  than  that  object  of  their  bitter  oppres- 
sion ;  or.  Where  the  need  is  highest,  there  is 
God's  aid  nighest ;  or,  "  For  a  small  moment 
have  I  forsaken  thee  ;  but  with  great  mercies 
will  I  gather  thee  "  (Isa.  liv.  7 ;  cf.  Lam.  v.  20; 
Psa.  xxxvii.  2.");  Heb.  xiii.  5,  etc.). 

JlomUettc  suggestions  ori,  particular  paitsages. 

On  v.  2,  Melancthon,  "  Est  hcfc  prcedictio  tes- 

*  [This  apology  of  the  author  for  the  wTecks  of  this  pas- 
page  after  tlie  e.xpiirgation  from  fiplirions  additions — to  an 
ill-defined  extent— is  a  vain  plea.  Once  admit  the  fact  of 
such  interpolations,  in  any  considerable  degree  at  least,  and 
the  credit  of  the  prophecy  is  irretrievably  destroyed.  Kvery 
one  will  be  at  liberty  to  expunge  ad  iiiiUian  what  he  fan- 
cies to  be  a  vaticinium  ex  epentu.} 


timoninm  illnstre,  quod  a  Deo  trnditam  esst 
Prophitanun  doctriuam  ostendit.  Et  quia  pol- 
licttiir  liliirationem,  significat  Deo  euro:  esse  hiinc 
populttm,  qui  doctrinum  propheticam  amplecti- 
tur.  ConfirmantuT  ergo  pii,  ne  a  Deo  dejiciant, 
ne  ahjiciant  Inijiis  doctrines  professioncm.  Per- 
tinet  autem  postrema  pars  Juijus  longes  concionis 
etiam  ad  hanc  ultiniam  mundi  aitatem  et  ad  Ec- 
clesice  (Brumnas,  quas  tulit  jam  niuttis  secculis ; 
dum  alibi  Malunnetica  rabies  conatur  prorsus 
delere  nomen  Filii  Dei,  alibi  reirnant  Episcopi 
ethnico  more  et  studin  ecclcsiasti^u  negligunt, 
sinunt  extingid  lucem  Evangelii,  proponunt  idola 
et  lihidinei,  injusle  occidunt  himiinei  innoeentes 
propter  verce  doctrinm  professionem  (therefore 
the  supplanting  of  Christianity  by  the  Pope  and 
the  Turks — a  New-Test,  counterpart  to  the  ad- 
vance of  the  northern  and  southern  kingdoms 
against  Israel).  H(tc  mala  pii  considerent,  ut 
primum  a  Deo  petant,  vt  ipse  Ecdesiam  siiam 
servet,  regat,  foveat  et  augeat ;  deinde  si  qni  pos- 
sunt  aliquibus  ^uineribus  m^dei-i,  annitantur  pre 
sua  focatitine"  etc. 

On  V.  33,  Calvin:  '■^  Htvc  cireumstantia  mag- 
7i7im  pondus  in  se  continet,  quia  cidemus  mxdtos 
ad  tempus  satis  virili  esse  et  intrepido  animo, 
postea  languescere  et  tandem  etanescere,  ut  fiant 
prorsus  sui  dissimiles.  Angelas  autem  hie  pro- 
mittit  fore  insuperabilem  constantiam  eorum, 
qui  sustinebuntur  Dei  spiritu,  ita  ut  non  una 
tantum  die  ml  mense  vel  anno  certent,  sed  sub- 
inde  cnUigant  aniinos  et  nova  eertamina,  neque 
unquam  dffciant." — Cramer:  "God  supports 
his  own  even  in  the  most  violent  persecutions, 
and  preserves  them  from  apo-stasy." — Starke  : 
"A  real  Christian  must  venture  his  body,  life, 
and  all  that  he  has,  for  the  glory  of  God." 

On  v.  35,  Calvin :  "  Sequitur,  nullos  pollere 
tanta  sanctimonia  et  puritate.  quin  adhuc  resi- 
deant  in  ipsis  aliquee  sordes.  qua;  purgationem 
(xigunt,  ita  ut  ipsis  necesse  sit  transire  per  for- 
nacem,  et  mnndari  instar  auri  et  argcnti.  .  Hoc 
ad  omnes  Dei  martyres  extendilur.  Unde  etiam 
videmus.  quam  insulse  Papistic  iniagineiitur 
merita  Sanctorum  ad  nos  redumdare,  quoiiiam 
plus  quam  necesse  erat  pnesiiterint.''^ — Osiander: 
"  God  has  set  a  limit  to  every  persecution,  be- 
yond which  it  cannot  pass." — Starke:  "The 
trial  is  succeeded  by  the  time  of  refreshing,  and 
the  suffering  by  the  time  of  rejoicing;  Tob.  iii. 
31." 

On  V.  39  et  seq.  :  "Upon  the  surface  the 
worshippers  of  the  beast  seem  to  prosper,  but 
they  are  eventually  compelled  to  realize  that 
their  honors  and  possessions  are  not  eternal  in 
their  duration,  while  the  followers  of  the  Lamb 
shall  enjoy  evcrlastmg  glory  ....  (On  v.  44  et 
seq. )  :  Although  God  permits  many  an  evil  pur- 
pose to  be  executed,  His  forbearance  toward 
the  godless  is  always  merely  for  a  time ;  Psa. 
1.  21." 


260  THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


c.  Condition  of  the  vision.  The  Messianic  deliverance  and  glorifying  of  God's  people,  together  with 
a  reference  to  tlte  definite  determination  by  God  of  tfie  time  at  which  the  Messiah's  coming  tc 
ddiver  should  transpire. 

Chap.  XII. 

1  And  at  [in]  that  time  shall  Michael  stand  vp,  the  great  prince  which  [who] 
standeth  for  [ore;-  against]  «/ie  children  of  thy  people;  and  there  shall  he  a  time 
of  trouble,  such  as  [which]  never  was'  since  there  was  a  nation  even  to  [till] 
that  same  time:  and  at  [in]  that  time  thy  people  shall  be  delivered,  every  one 

2  that  shall  he  found  written  in  the  book.  And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the 
dust  [ground]  of  the  earth  [dust]  shall  awake,  some' [these]  to  everlasting  life, 

3  and  so^ne  [these]  to  shame  [reproaches]  and  [to]  everlasting  contempt.  And 
thei/  that  be  Avise  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  firmament ;  and  they  that 
turn  [the]  manv  to  righteousness,  as  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever. 

■  4  But  [And]  thou,  0  Daniel,  shut  up  the  words,  and  seal  the  book,  even  to 
[till]  the  time  of  the  end  :  many  shall  run  to  and  fro  [run  through  the  book], 
and  [the]  knowledge  [of  it]  shall  be  increased. 

5  Then  [And]  I  Daniel  looked,  and,  behold,  there  stood  other  two,  the  one  on 
this  side  of  the  bank  [iiither  at  the  lip]  of  the  river,'  and  the  other  [one]  on  that 

6  side  of  the  bank  [hither  at  the  lip]  of  the  river.'  And  one  said  to  the  man 
clothed  in  linen,  which  [who]  was  upon   the  w.aters '  of  the  river,' How  long 

7  [Till  when]  .shall  it  be  to  the  end  of  these  [the]  wonders  ?  And  I  heard  the  man 
clothed  in  linen,  which  [who]  was  upon  the  waters'  of  the  river,  when  [and] 
he  held  up  his  right  hand  and  his  left  hand  nnto  heaven  [toward  the  heavens], 
and  sware  by  him  that  liveth  for  ever,  that  it  shall  be  for  a  time,  times,  and  a 
half;  and  when  he  shall  have  accomplished  to  scatter  [as  (at)  the  finishing  of 
scattering]  the  power  [hand]  of  the  holy  people,  all  these  things  shall  be  fin- 
ished. 

8  And  I*  heard,  but  I  understood  not  [could  not  understand]  :  then  [and]  said 

9  I,  0  my  Lord,  what  shall  be  the  end  [sequel]  of  these  things  .^  And  he  said,  Go 
thy  way,  Daniel ;  for  the  words  are  closed  up  and  sealed  till  the  time  of  the 
end. 

10  Many  shall  be  purified  [purify  themselves],  and  made  white  [whiten  them- 
selves], and  tried  [be  smelted]  ;  but  the  wicked  shall  do  wickedly :  and  none 
of  the  wicked  shall  understand ;  but  [and]  the  wise  [prudent]  shall  understand. 

11  And  from  the  time  that  the  daily  [continual]  sacrifice  shall  be  taken  away,  and 
the  abomination   that  maJceth   desolate  set  ^cp  [to  the  giving  of  the  desolate 

12  abomination],  there  shall  be  a  thousand  two  hundred  and  ninety  days.  Blessed 
is  he  that  waiteth,  and  cometh  to  the  thousand  three  hundred  and  five  and 

thirty  days.  r      in    i  i    i 

13  But  [And]  go  thou'  thy  way  till  [to]  the  end  he:  for  [and]  thou  shalt  rest, 
and  stand  in  [to  (at)]  thy  lot  at  the  end  of  the  days. 

LEXICAL    AND     GRAMMATICAL    NOTES. 
['  nrT'n:,  wm  maOe  tn  exist,  or  mm  gone  through,  contains  tho  idea  of  exhaustion.—'  ns";n,  strictly,  the  canal, 
proiierly  applied  to  the -Vite,  but  here  used  of  any  aUuvial  stream.— =  The  reduplicated  forms  ^XJ-'ob   ^J^??   seem  to 
tall  special  attention  to  the  position  of  this  being,  which  was  not  precisely  defined  before,  ch.  x.  5.-«  The  pronoun  ll 
emphatic.] 

shall  come  to  his  end  "  without  a  helper."  *     In 

EXEGETICAL    BEMARKS.  •  [Kcil  (as  we  have  seen)  makes  the  transition  from  the 

Antiochian  to  the  Messianic  rera  occur  at  an  earlier  point  in 

Verses  1-3.   The  Messianic  deliverance  and  the    the  prophecy,  and  'je"'^8es  the  connective  force  on^^^^ 

.     ,  .  ^         .  t        i    -i    *•  A»^  ..f  +v.«t      troductory  clau'ie  of  the  verse,  espo'-ially  tne  ^  ot  convccu- 

jiidnment  for  eternal  retribution.      And  at  that  '■ro""'-^   s                    v„«„t  „,.  intKrvni  rin  be  admitted 

/.■'.•'    ^    .,       ,.          •*■]•„  4.„j    /„;     AW  tion.  as  a  proof  that  no  break  or  mterval  can  oe  an  mute  a 

time;  i.e..  at  the  time   ]ust  indicated  (xi.   40),  ^^^^     This  is  an  unnecessary  straining  of  the  phra-eology. 

when    judgment    shall    overtake    the    impious  ^^  ^^^^  phrases  of  date,  like  Kinn  nSa  heie,  nsually 

oppressor,  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  when  he  .  -      •■ 


CHAP.  XII.  1-13. 


261 


opposition  to  Havemick's  attempt  to  interpret 
8t*nn  r.T:^  in  the  indefinite  sense  of  '•  once,  at 
a  certain  time,"  nearly  all  recent  expositors 
have  justly  contended:  (1)  that  the  copula  t 
connects  this  new  designation  of  time  most  in- 
timately with  the  preceding ;  (2)  that  it  is 
impossible  to  regard  the  words  <^'^~!1  a'1''3i 
■which  Havernick  adduces  in  comparison,  other- 
wise than  as  a  reference  to  the  time  indicated  in 
the  context  immediately  preceding;  (3)  that 
the  time  referred  to  is  immediately  afterward 
characterized  as  a  time  of  trouble,  which  shows 
with  sufficient  clearness,  that,  like  the  mention 
■of  the  n-b"'3™'a  in  V.  3  (cf .  xi.  35),  the  allusion 
is  to  the  period  of  persecution  under  Antiochus 
as  heretofore  described.* — Shall  Michael  stand 
up,  the  great  prince,  which  staudeth  for  the 
children  of  thy  people.  This  introdviction  of 
Michael  as  the  heavenly  ally  and  protector  of 
Israel  (not  as  the  Son  of  God  or  the  Messiah 
himself, — as  Havernick,  in  accord  with  the  older 
exegesis,  still  supposes^,  refers  back  to  chap.  xi. 
1,  and  also  to  the  preliminaries  to  the  vision  as 
a  whole  in  chap,  x,,  and  especially  to  x.,  13,  21, 
in  the  same  way  as  ^'^'^\}  ~??^  refers  to  the 
close  of  the  preceding  chapter.  In  both  plaoes 
n>23>  is  employed  Keiisii  bellkn,  and  denotes  an 
aimed  and  martial  appearance  (cf.  xi.  14,  16, 
etc.).  35,  following  T3>'n,  serves  to  express 
the  idea  of  protecting  oversight  over.  etc. ,  as  in 
Esth.  viii.  11;  ix.  l(i.  He  "stands  up"  or 
"stands  there"  for  the  children  of  thy  people, 
t.  e. ,  he  represents  their  interests  in  the  way  of 
actively  supporting  them  and  of  protecting 
them  ;  cf.  chap.  x.  13.— And  there  shall  be  a 
time  of  trouble,  suoli  as  never  was  since  there 
■was  a  nation  even  to  that  same  time ;  i.e.,  the 
trouble  of  the  faithful  shall  then  reach  its  high- 
est intensity,  shall  have  reached  its  climax  when 
deliverance  flnaUy  arrives ;  cf.  chap.  xi.  45  ;  ix. 
26,  27.  On  the  relative  clause  nrr^n:  sb  -ir» 
'i31,  which  describes  this  as  a  time  of  unheard 
of,  unprecedented  trouble,  cf.  Ex.  ix.  18,  24  ; 
Joel  ii.  3,  and  particularly  Jer.  xxx.  7,  which 


Indicate  a  tran.«;ition  rather  than  a  close  Kequence,  Cf. 
Stuart,  who  instances  especially  Isa.  xix.  2^3 ;  xxvi.  1 ;  and 
even  Dan.  ii.  4-4.] 

•  [Keil,  on  the  other  hand,  thinks  that   "  STIPI  r531 
points  back  to  yp   PSa  (ch.  xi.  40),"  which  he  interprets 

as  "the  time  of  the  end,  when  tlie  hostile  persecutor  rises 
up  to  subdue  the  whole  world,"  i.e..  the  final  Antichrt.st. 
The  trans;tion  appears  to  us  precisely  analogous  to  that 
found  in  our  Lord's  cschatolo-acal  discourse,  Matt.  xxiv. 
29  ;  Mark  xiii.  24  :  and  it  seems  to  stand  h^re.  as  there,  for 
a  connecting  link  between  the  near  and  the  remote  applica- 
tion of  the  prediction.  The  distress  of  the  Antiochian  per- 
secution, like  that  of  the  final  siege  of  Jerusalem,  is  made 
the  symbol  of  the  ecclesiastico-pulitical  throes  of  the  final 
catastrophe,  the  downfall  of  Judaism  being  there  the  pre- 
cursor of  that  of  the  world  itself.  The  phrase,  "Mn  that 
time,"  thus  becomes  parallel  with  the  formula,  •*  In  that 
day,"  or,  "  In  those  days."  "  In  the  last  day."  etc.,  as  a 
stereotyped  desiirnation  of  the  Messianic  tera.  It  is  the 
constant  i>raciice  of  the  prophet*  to  view  these  serie  of 
future  events  on  the  same  plane  and  in  the  same  perspec- 
tive, the  interval,  as  well  that  between  the  close  of  the  Old 
Dispensation  and  the  introduction  of  the  New,  as  that 
between  the  establishment  of  the  latter  and  its  ultimate  tri- 
umph, being  left  out  of  view.  There  is  thus  always  a  meas- 
ure of  indcfin-.teness  in  the  prophetical  utterances  on  these 
points,  especially  in  the  phraseology  relating  to  these  '*  times 
ai>d  seasons,"! 


latter  passage  seems  to  have  served  generally  as 
a  prototype  of  the  text. — And  at  that  time  thy 
people  shall  be  delivered.  Kranichfeld  re- 
marks properly,  that  "  the  deliverance  of  Israel 
^''"."?~)  which  is  here  conceived  of  t\s  accom- 
plished under  the  direction  of  IXD^Ja,  is  coinci- 
dent in  fact  with  the  descriptions  of  chap.  vii. 
18,  26  et  seq.,  14  ;  ix.  24  ;  and  the  entrance  to 
the  Ancient  of  days  'vii-  13)  of  him  who  was  like 
the  son  of  man,  and  who  was  the  spiritually  en  • 
dowed  leader  of  Israel,  i.e.,  the  Mashiach, 
sprung  from  Israel  itself,  receives  notice  aa 
being  the  final  result  and  attestation  of  the  vic- 
torious conflict  maintained,  under  the  invisible 
direction  of  the  angel  bs:"-:,  against  the  ad- 
versary of  the  theocracy,  who  appears  in  the 
history  of  the  nations.  The  absolute  identity 
of  the  Mashiach  with  ;n;i?3,  whose  spiritual 
endowments  and  official  relation.s  were  similar 
to  his,  does  not,  however,  become  manifest 
from  this  observation — as  Hiivemick  and  others 
assert — despite  the  appropriate  and  well-founded 
ajyplicat.ion  of  the  description  to  the  glorified 
Sou  of  man  in  person,  in  the  New-Test,  Apoca- 
lypse,— any  more  than  the  direct  identity  of 
Satan,  the  adversary  of  God  in  the  angelic 
world,  with  the  New-Test,  antichrist,  who 
stands  under  his  a^gis,  can  be  demonstrated," — 
Every  one  that  shall  be  found  wrritteu  in  the 
book ;  or,  "  whosoever  .shall  find  himself  re- 
corded in  the  book,"  The  .A  V.  is  literal.  On 
ba  in  the  sense  of  "  whosoever,  quicunque"  cf. 
Isa.  xliii.  7 ;  2  Sam.  ii.  23.  Ttie  book  is  the 
same  as  that  mentioned  in  the  similar  passage, 
Isa.  iv.  3,  and  hence,  the  book  of  life  ;  cf.  on 
chap.  vii.  10.  It  is,  of  course,  not  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  "list  of  liriny  Israelites"  (cf.  Psa. 
Ixix.  2!) ;  Ex.  xxxii.  32)  ;  nor,  prol)ably,  as  a 
"  record  of  those  who  shall  be  delivered  in  the 
decisive  hour  and  be  permitted  to  live."  It  is 
rather  a  record  of  those  who  shall  inherit  eternal 
life,  a  "list  of  the  subjects  of  Messiah's  king- 
dom "  (cf.  Hitzig  on  the  passage),  of  those  iclio 
shall  stand  ujyproved  in  the  judgment,  whether 
they  live  until  it  transpires,  or  are  raised  from 
the  dead  to  meet  it,  according  to  v.  2.  Hof- 
mann  (Sehriftbew.,  I.  209)  is  in  substantial 
accord  \vith  this  view — the  "  Divine  register  of 
Israel,  upon  which  are  entered  aU  who  truli/  be- 
long to  Israel," — while  Ftiller  arbitrarily  applies 
the  expression  in  this  place  to  the  "book  of 
truth,"  chap.  x.  21. — Verse  2.  And  many  of 
them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth ;  ra- 
ther, "  and  many  of  them  that  sleep  under  the 
earth;  "  literally,  "  many  of  the  sleupers  of  the 

dii^t-land."     IpS-.ia-Nl,  "  land,  earth  of  dust" 

{i.e.,  the  dust  of  the  grave,  cf.  Psa.  xxii.  16,  30  ; 
Isa.  xxvi.  19,  etc),  is  substantially  equivalent  to 
"  earth -dust,  soU  ;  "  the  5"  S<  '^"•i^.  are  those 
who  sleep  the  sleep  of  death  in  that  dust  of  the 
earth ;  cf.  Psa.  xiii.  4  ;  Job  iii.  13  ;  Jer.  Ii.  39, 
57;  and  also  the  New-Test.  Kiiiiuuivm.  KCKoiiir,- 
jiivnt. — Shall  awetke,  some  to  everlasting  life, 
etc.  While  all  the  ancient  Christian  expositors 
regard  this  as  referring  to  the  fimeral  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead,  and,  among  modems,  Haver- 
nick, Hofmann,  Auberlen,  Ziindel,  Kliefoth, 
etc.,  still  agree  with  that  view,  which  makes 


2iy2 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


''many "to  be  equivalent  to  "all"  (or  trans- 
'ates,  with  Hofmann,  Sc/iriftbew.,  II.  2,  549. 
"and  in  multitudes  shall  they  arise  from  the 
world  of  the  dead  "),  a  majority  of  writers  since 
Bertholdt  (also  Kranichfeld,  Fidler,  Kostliu,  in 
JStud.  und  Krlt..  1S(J0,  No.  2,  p.  2.32)  hold  that 
the  many  who  awake  from  their  sleep  belong 
xolelt/  til  the  niition  iif  Israel ;  as  Fuller  expresses 
it,  p.  o.j!)  :  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  foretold 
in  this  place  is  "  not  the  last  and  general  resur- 
rection, but  a  partial  one  which  precedes  that, 
and  is  confined  to  Daniel's  nation."  It  is  mani- 
fest, however,  that  the  Snal  and  general  resur- 
rection is  here  intended,  (1)  because  the  expres- 
sion, the  "  sleepers  of  the  dust  of  the  earth  "  is 
far  too  general  in  its  character,  to  admit  of  its 
being  limited  to  the  deceased  Israelites  ;  (3)  be- 
cause the  mention  of  the  eternal  punishment  of 
the  wicked  in  the  closing  words  of  the  verse 
would  be  incomprehensible,  and  ser\-e  no  pur- 
pose, if  they  refer  only  to  Israelites  who  are  to 
be  punished  eternally  (see  the  context  immedi- 
ately below);  (o)  further,  S"iZ"i,  which  primari- 
ly implies  the  iurmeasurable  extent  of  the  mul- 
titude of  the  resurrected  dead  (cf.  Hofmann's 
rendering:  "in  multitudes"),  may  as  well 
designate  the  entire  world  of  dead  arising  from 
their  graves  as  a  large  fraction  of  it — in  the 
same  way  as  -n/'/ni  or  o\  -o/./.o/  is  frequently 
employed  in  the  New  Test,  as  synonymous  with 
-'iiTtr;  cf.,  c.ej..  Matt.  XX.  28  ;  xxvi.  28,  with  1 
John  ii.  2  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  23  ;  Rom.  v.  IT),  16,  ndth 
v.  13 ;  *  (4)  if  the  earlier  prophetic  parallels,  Isa. 
xxvi.  Ul  ;  Ixvi.  24  ;  Ezek.  xxxvii.  1-15,  actually 
do  foretell  a  partial  resurrection  which  is  con- 
fined to  Israel  (which  can  by  no  means  be  posi- 
tively established,  since  they  rest,  without  ex- 
ception, on  the  pre-supposition  of  an  ultimate 
resurrection  of  a^huen,  cf .  Hofmann,  Schriftbev., 
II.  2,  4(U  et  seq.),  this  "noil  not  involve  that  the 
passage  before  us  has  a  similar  bearing;  (5)  on 
the  contrary,  the  expectation  of  a  genered  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  whose  existence  is  abun- 
dantly evidenced  in  the  Jewish  apocalyptic  litera- 
ture (2  Mace.  vii.  14)  and  in  the  New  Test,  (see 
especially  John  v.  28  et  seq.  ;  Acts  xxiv.  15), 
would  require  thrit  there  should  not  be  wanting 
Ijiisid  testimonies  to  that-fact  in  the  canoniad  Old 
Test,  as  icell,  which  would  obviously  be  the  case 
if  this  passage  referred  exclusively  to  a  particu- 
lar resurrection  of  the  Israelites  ;  (6)  nor  does 
the  intimate  connection  of  the  passage  with  the 
preceding  context,  or,  in  other  words,  the  con- 
catenation of  the  eschatological  prophecies  in 
vs.  l-'S  with  the  a!ra  of  the  Autiochian-Macca- 
baian  troubles,  as  described  in  the  preceding 
chapter,  militate  against  the  universal  character 
of  the  resurrection  in  question.  It  is  evident 
that  in  the  mind  of  the  prophet  that  period  of 
trial  was  the  immediate  precursor  of  the  end  of 

■*  Cf.  Calvui  on  th.it  passage:  "Multos  /tic  ponit  pro 
OMNIBUB.  ut  certjim  ent.  Xeque  Iufc  tucutio  dthet  jiobif 
ruidi-l  nbsurda.  Ann  entm  RABDINn  oppuni'  anuelus  omni- 
bus vel  pauclfl,  sed  oj)poil!i  UNI ;  cfr,  Rom.  v.  16,  19."  [Keil 
observes  that  "  the  an^el  has  it  not  in  view  to  prive  a  general 
Btatcment  resariiing  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  but  only 
di.scloses  on  this  i)riint  that  the  final  salvation  of  the  people 
shall  not  be  limited  to  tl.ose  still  living  at  the  end  of  the 
great  tribul.ition,  but  shall  include  also  those  who  have  lost 
their  lives  durnig  the  iieriod  of  the  tribulation,"  This, 
however,  seems  an  unneecssary  liniitution  of  the  •'  many,'* 
which  Keil  himself  admits  ''can  only  be  rightly  inter- 
preted from  the  context."  Stuart  clearly  argues  that  the 
coiiucction  gives  it  here  the  universal  sense.} 


the  world.  *  As  he  viewed  it,  the  end  of  the 
persecution  by  Antiochus  and  the  advent  of  the 
Messiah  to  introduce  a  new  and  eternal  period 
of  blessing  were  substantially  coincident.  He 
saw  nothing  at  all  of  the  long  series  of  yeaiB 
that  were  to  intervene  between  those  Old-Test. 
"  teoes  of  the  Mes.siah  "  and  his  actual  birth  and 
incarnation,  nor  did  he  observe  the  many  cen- 
turies between  His  first  and  second  advent,  be- 
tween the  beginning  of  the  end  and  the  ultimate 
end  of  all  things,  because  it  was  inconsistent 
with  the  nature  of  prophetic  vision  (cf.  supra, 
Eth.-fund.  principles,  etc.,  on  chap.  ix.  No.  1). 
The  antitypical  general  judgment  of  all  flesh 
was  identical  with  the  typical  judgment  that 
came  upon  the  Old-Test,  oppressor  of  God's  peo- 
ple, to  his  understanding  ;  and  it  is  therefore 
equally  one-sided  to  deprive  the  judgment  here 
referred  to  of  its  universal  character,  and  to  re- 
duce it  to  a  special  judgment  over  the  good  and 
the  wicked  Israelites,  as  Bertholdt,  Hitzig,  and 
the  remaining  rationalistic  expositors  contend, 
— or  to  arbitrarily  refer  v.  1  to  the  deliverance 
of  Israel  from  the  oppression  of  Antiochus,  and 
therefore  interpret  it  typically  and  distinctively, 
but  vs.  3  and  S  to  the  general  resurrection  and 
judgment,  making  them  antitypical  and  eschato- 
logical, so  that  an  immense  chasm  between  the 
time  of  vs.  1  and  2  is  postulated,  of  whose  exist- 
ence there  is  no  indication  in  the  text.  Against 
this  arbitrary  disruption  of  a  description  that 
obviously  forms  a  unit,  see  Hilgenfeld,  Die  Pro- 
jiheten  Ezra  tmd  Daniel,  p.  84,  and  also  Kran- 
ichfeld, p.  402.  A  hiatus  of  centuries  certainly 
exists  ;  but  it  belongs  between  chajD.  xi.  45  and 
chap.  xii.  1,  and  is  of  such  a  character  that  the 
prophet  could  have  been  in  no  way  conscious  of 
its  presence. f — And  some  to  shame,  and  ever- 
lasting contempt.  As  the  awaking  "to  ever- 
lasting life  "  recalls  Isa.  xxvi.  19,  so  the  arising 
"to  shame,  to  everlasting  contempt"  (TlStl'li 
Stat,  constr.  of  Ti'*'^!,  similar  to  11"?!,  constr. 
of  lilST)  suggests  Isa.  Ixvl  24.  Cf.  the  New- 
Test,  expressions  avao-acu;  npiazuQ,  John  v.  29, 
and  rfdrarof  iV-iTf^jof,  Kev.  xx.  14. — Fuller  sup- 
poses, very  arbitrarily,  that  "the  resurrection 
to  shame  "  is  "merely  a  passing  observation," 
which  might  be  omitted  from  the  passage  with- 
out damaging  its  meaning.  On  the  contrary, 
the  mention  of  the  eternal  shame  and  torment 
which  await  the  wicked  at  the  judgment  is  a 
leading  thought,  which  was  not  only  suggested, 
but  positively  demanded,  by  the  recent  mention 
of  the  helpless  and  irretrievable  ruin  of  ihe 
antichristian  madman  (xi.  45),  and  which  de- 
serves consideration  as  a  leading  proof  that  toe 
judgment  here  foretold  is  not  to  be  distinctively 
Jewish,  but  universal  in  its  character,  precisely 
because  of  this  undeniable  reference  to  chap.  xi. 
45  b;  see  supra.  No.    2. — 'V^erse  3.  And   they 


*  [This  view  is  unnecessary,  and  places  the  prophet  in  a 
false  light.  Daniel  does  not  explicitly  say  that  the^e  eventd 
are  simultaneous,  if  we  have  rightly  apprehended  and  ex- 
pounded his  language.  He  did  not  indeed  clearly  appre- 
hend the  hrngth  of  the  int*'rval.  but  we  :ire  not  warranted 
hi  saying  that  he  was  not  aware  there  was  any.  Much  lesa 
does  he  assert  it.] 

t  [Keil  of  course  disputes  this  interval  at  the  place 
assigned  to  it  by  our  author.  Stuart  als<j  is  unable  to  dis- 
cover it  there.  Both  lay  undue  stress  upon  the  conuoctmff 
link.  '*  lu  that  time."l 


CHAP.  XII.   1-13. 


2fi3 


that  be  wise  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of 
the  firmament.  There  is  no  more  reason  here 
than  in  chap.  xi.  33,  35,  to  translate  S^i"2"4;"2ri 
otherwise  than  "  the  wise,  prudent,  or  under- 
standing" ones.  It  does  not  characterize  the 
pious  generally  (who  were  designated  as  the 
"many."  ""?-•  i^  chap.  xi.  33,  and  who  are 
again  mentioned  by  the  same  term  in  A  of  this 
verse),  but  "  those  who  were  prominent  among 
the  people  by  their  piety,  fidelity,  and  stead- 
fastnes.s,  wlio  accomplished  more  than  others  by 
word  and  deed,  and  suffered  more  than  others 
for  the  holy  covenant"  (Fuller).  It  is  self-evi- 
dent that  the  activity  of  .such  theocraticaUy 
wise  or  prudent  persons  would  include  the  work 
of  teaching,  but  this  does  not  involve  the  neces- 
sity of  rendering  c-ji-u."":  directly  by  "  teach- 
ers." This  over-precise  adaptation  of  the  idea 
is  not  established  by  the  parallel  3''?'in  "'p'^i::^, 
nor  by  the  designation  of  Jehovah's  servant  by 
;"'3w",  in  Isa.  lii.  13  (against  Hitzig).  On  the 
other  hand,  the  too  general  and  diluted  renc'er- 
ing.  "  pious,  well-disposed  ones  "  (de  Wette),  has 
no  sufficient  support,  e.g.,  in  Matt.  xiii.  44  ;  for 
Christ's  statement  respecting  the  "righteous" 
in  general,  that  "they  shall  shine  as  the  sun  in 
the  kingdom  of  their  Father,"  is  a  free  applica- 
tion, but  not  a  translation  or  an  explanation  of 
this  pa,ssage. — On  the  comparison  of  the  shining 
of  the  "wise  (1'~I~,  properly,  "to  radiate 
brightness,  to  shine  brightly  ";  with  that  of  the 
bright  arch  of  heaven  (?^p~,  "  the  firmament," 
cf.  the  expositors  on  Gen.  i.  0),  see  especially 
Ex.  xxiv.  10  ;  also  Ezek.  i.  22,  20,  etc. — And 
they  that  turn  (the)  many  to  righteousness, 
as  the  stars  for  ejex  and  ever.  The  words 
^"2~n  ip"'~iQ  seem  to  have  been  borrowed 
from  Isa.  liii.  11,  but  do  not  on  that  account 
justify  the  assertion  of  Krauichfeld,  that  only 
originators  of  the  righteousness  mediated  by  the 
2)riextly  function, — hence  prie.sts,  "who  take 
away  the  sins  of  the  people  through  the  sacra- 
fieiiU  ceremonial  " — are  to  be  understood  there- 
by; — a  view  concerning  p^'lSn  that  is  entirely 
too  contracted,  and,  at  the  same  time,  interpo- 
lating in  character,  which  finds  no  support  either 
in  the  former  mention  of  theocratic  sacrifices 
(vii.  23;  viii.  11,  13;  ix.  26),  or  in  the  passage, 
chap.  ix.  24. — The  stars  are  mentioned  as  sym- 
bols of  the  heavenl.v  condition  of  the  righteous 
who  have  been  glorified  after  the  image  of  God 
in  I  Cor.  xv.  40  et  seq.  ;  Rev.  ii.  2S ;  cf.  also 
supra,  on  chap.  viii.  10. 

Verse  4.  Condndiny  exhortation  of  the  prophe- 
syiny  angel.  But  thou,  O  Daniel  shut  up  (or 
"conce.al")  the  words,  and  seal  the  book. 
The  "  words"  and  the  "  book  "  can  hardly  de 
signate  the  entire  book  of  Daniel's  prophecies, 
but  refer  merely  to  the  final  vision,  chap.  xi.  2- 
xii.  3  (Hiivern.,  Von  Leng. ,  Kranichf. ,  Fiiller, 
etc.,  are  correct!.  On  ^CO  as  denoting  a  lim- 
ited section  of  connected  writing,  which  occu- 
pies a  single  roll.  cf.  Neh.  i.  1  ;  Jer.  li.  63 ;  also 
supra,  on  chap.  i-x.  2.*     On  criO.  "to  conceal," 

*   [Keil,  on  the  ether  hand,  inclines  (with  Bertholdt,  Hit- 
sig,   Aubeilen,   KUefoth)  to   "understand    by  "nDDn  the 


— i.e.,  to  preserve  in  secret,  or  not  publish  it — 
and  2rn,  "  to  seal,"  which  is  added  to  strength- 
en the  idea,  see  on  chap.  viii.  (i.  Neither  of  the 
words  was  to  be  taken  literally,  of  course 
(against  Hitzig).  What  the  .angel  required  of 
the  prophet,  and  to  which  the  latter  doubtiesi 
consented,  was  merely  that  lie  should  avoid  any 
intentional  or  inconsiderate  publishing  of  the 
prophecy,  hence,  that  he  should  transmit  it  into 
chaste,  approved,  and  trustworthy  hands,  that 
would  be  prepared  to  treat  it  in  accordance  with 
its  mysterious  and  awe-compeUing  subject. — To 
the  time  of  the  end;  i.e.,  until  the  juncture 
indicated  in  v.  1,  to  which  the  entire  prophecy, 
beginning  with  chap.  xi.  2,  is  directed. — Many 
shall  run  to  and  fro,  and  knowledge  shall  b  i 
increased ;  rather,  ' '  many  shall  search  it 
through,  and  the  understanding  shall  become 
great."  ^acJa"^,  properly,  "they  shall  run 
about,"  namely,  for  the  pur'jiose  of  searching  or 
investigating  ;  cf.  Jer.  v.  1 ;  Am.  viii.  12;  Zech. 
iv.  10  ;  2  Chron.  xvi.  9.  The  interpretation  by 
"wandering  abont,  roving  about  without  a 
guide  "  (as  contrasted  with  the  assured  guidance 
afforded  by  God's  word),  which  was  advocated 
by  J.  D.  Michaelis  and  Von  Lengerke,  cannot  be 
established  ;  nor  can  the  sense  of  '"  careful  read- 
ing," which  was  adopted  by  Maurer,  Hitzig, 
Kwald,  etc.,  be  demonstrated,  despite  the  cita- 
tion of  the  rabbinicid  ~2'r,  2^23,  "  a  line  (of 
reading),  a  straight  line,"  which  is  alleged  as 
underlying  the  words  in  the  text. — The  whole 
observation  was  evidently  intended  to  assign  a 
reason  for  the  exhortation  to  conceal  the  im- 
parted prophec3',  and  treat  it  saci-edl.v,  and  to 
prevent  its  falling  into  profane  hands  ;  for  that 
prophecy  w'as  not  unimportant  and  ordinary  in 
its  character,  but  a  means  to  secure  to  many, 
who  should  zealouslj-  examine  it  in  the  future, 
a  deeper  insight  into  the  ways  of  God,  the  con- 
troller of  aU  earthly  f'^rtunes.  For  that  reason 
it  would  be  sinful  to  profane  it.  ["  If  Daniel, 
therefore,  must  only  place  the  prophecy  securely, 
that  it  may  continue  to  the  time  of  the  end,  the 
sealing  then  does  not  exclude  the  use  of  it  in 
transcriptions,  and  there  exists  no  reason  for 
thinking  that  the  searching  into  it  will  take 
place  only  for  the  first  time  in  the  end"  (Keil).] 
Verses  5-7.  •Solemn  averment,  by  oath,  of  the  as- 
sured realizing  of  the  prophecy  until  a  determined 
point  in  the  future — namelj',  until  the  expira- 
tion of  the  mystical  three  and  a  half  years,  to 
whose  close  the  prophet  had  already  been  re  • 
ferred,  chap.  vii.  25  (cf.  viii.  14;  ix.  27).  The 
recurrence  of  this  comforting  designation  of 
time  indicate.s  that  the  contents  of  these  vereea 
to  the  end  of  the  chapter  are  designed  tj  form  an 
epilogue,  not  merely  to  the  last  prophetic  vision 
(chap,  x.-xii.    3),   but  to  the  entire  prophetic 

whole  book.  For,  as  Kliefoth  remarlcs,  fhe  angel  will  close, 
ver.  4,  the  last  revel.ition,  and  alon?  with  it  the  whole  pro- 
phetical worlc  of  Daniel,  and  dismiss  him  from  his  propheti- 
cal ofllce,  as  he  afterwards,  ver.  13.  does,  after  he  has  given 
him,  vers.  5-1'i.  disclosures  re£;arding  the  periods  of  these 
wonderful  things  that  were  announced.  He  must  seal  the 
book,  i.e.,  guard  it  securely  from  dicfiguremeut^  '  till  the 
time  of  the  end,'  because  its  contents  stretch  out  to  the  end. 
Cf.  ch.  viii.  2ti,  where  the  reason  for  the  sealing  is  stated  in 
the  words,  ■  for  yet  it  shall  be  for  many  days.'  Instead  of 
such  a  statement  as  that,  the  time  of  the  end  is  here  briefly 
named  as  the  termhmt,  down  to  which  the  revelation 
reaches,  in  harmony  with  the  cotitents  of  ch.  xi.  411-xii.  S, 
which  comprehends  the  events  of  the  time  of  the  end."] 


264 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


part  of  the  book,  and  even  to  the  whole  book 

itself.  The  new  scene,  however,  which  begins 
with  this  verse,  and  serves  to  introduce  the  epi- 
logue, obviously  occupies  a  more  intimate  rela- 
tion to  the  scene,  chap.  x.  4  et  seq.,  which 
introduces  the  last  great  vision,  than  to  the 
others,  and  may  even  be  regarded  as  a  resump- 
tion of  that  scene,  with  but  little  modification. 
Compare,  on  the  one  hand,  the  words  indicating 
a  new  beginning,  "  Then  I,  Daniel,  looked,"  etc., 
which  recall  chap.  x.  5,  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  circumstance  that  the  principal  person  in 
the  former  sceue,  the  mighty  angelic  prince, 
"clothed  in  linen,"  still  continues  to  be  the 
principal  person  in  word  and  action  (v.  6  et  seq.), 
although  two  other  angels,  who  had  not  been 
present  hitherto,  now  appeared  (as  witnesses  of 
the  oath  to  be  taken  by  him  ;  see  immediately 
below),  so  that  the  number  present  was  now 
double  its  former  size,  when  only  Daniel  and  the 
angelic  prince  in  linen  clothing  were  on  the 
scene. — And  behold,  there  stood  other  two; 
i.e.,  other  than  the  one  who  had  hitherto  spoken 
and  who  again  resumes  in  v.  7, — other  than  the 
priestly  angelic  prince  in  Unen  garments,  n^ir!?? 
is  certainly  not  used  with  reference  to  the 
speaker  introduced  in  v.  6  (Hengstenb. ),  but 
refers,  as  it  always  does,  to  what  has  been  pre- 
viously mentioned,  so  that  it  distinguishes  two 
other  persons  besides  the  angel  who  was  thus 
far  the  speaker  ;  and  these  enter  into  the  pro- 
phet's range  of  vision  at  this  point.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  these  persons  were  likewise 
angels ;  and  the  following  verses  leave  no  room 
to  question  that  their  number  was  precisely  two, 
that  they  might  be  recognized  as  witnesses  to 
the  oath  in  v.  7  ;  cf.  Deut.  xix.  15  ;  xxxi.  38 ;  2 
Cor.  xiii.  1,  etc.  (thus  correctly.  Hitzig,  Kran- 
ichfeld,  and  in  substance  KUefoth  also).  It 
would  be  useless,  however,  to  venture  any  sup- 
position as  to  who  the  two  angels  were,  for  the 
simple  reason  that  the  writer  did  not  see  fit  to 
furnish  their  names.  It  is  scarcely  probable 
that  they  were  Gabriel  and  Michael,  for  Daniel 
would  certainly  have  noticed  t/ieir  presence, 
since  he  had  already  mentioned  these  two  chief 
princes  among  the  angels  in  several  instances. 
Probably  angels  of  inferior  rank  are  to  be  con- 
ceived of,  since  they  were  capable  of  being  wit- 
nesses in  the  present  case.  Whether  they  were 
identical  with  the  two  saints  whom  the  prophet 
heard  conversing  together  in  chap.  viii.  13,  or 
not.  must  remain  undecided.  In  any  case,  the 
following  theories,  which  conflict  with  the  con- 
text, must  be  rejected  :  (1)  that  one  of  the  two 
^"";r'?*  "was  Gabriel,  whose  disappearance  was 
nowhere  mentioned  (Von  Lengerke) ;  (2)  that 
one  of  them  was  Gabriel,  but  the  other  was  a 
different  angel,  who  was  already  introduced  in 
the  fonner  scene,  chap.  x.  5  et  seq.,  but  had  not 
yet  been  designated  by  name  (thus  Havemick, 
who  consequently  finds  the  three  angels  of  this 
scene  present  in  chap,  x.,  without  exception, 
but  without  being  clearly  distinguished  from 
each  other) ;  (3)  that  the  D^~ns  were  the  guar- 
dian angels  or  princes  of  Persia  and  Graecia, 
mentioned  in  chap.  x.  20  (Jerome,  Luther,  Gro- 
tius,  Sanctius,  etc.);  (4)  that  they  were  Judas 
and  Simon  Maocabieus  (! — so  J.  D.  Michaelis) ; 
(j)  that  they  were  the  representatives  of  all  who 


in  the  future  should  wait  for  the  kingdom  ol 
God  and  inquire  after  the  time  of  its  comuag 
(Cocceius) ;  (6)  that  they  were  a  mystical  per- 
sonification either  of  the  law  and  prophecy  (thus 
a  gloss  in  the  margin  of  the  cod.  Chisiitu.)  or  of 
reason  and  imagination  (rabbins,  e.g.,  Jos.  Jac- 
chiades).  M.  Geier  already  remarks  respecting 
these  and  other  theories  of  a  similar  character : 
"  Ilcec  figmenta  sunt  hominum,  textus  auctorilatt 
destituta." — The  one  on  this  side  of  the  bank  oi 
the  river,  and  the  other  on  that  side  of  the 
bank  of  the  river ;  rather,  "the  one  here  on  the 
bank  of  the  river,  the  other  yonder  on  the  bank," 
etc.  "IS";!!,  usually  the  Heb.  name  for  the  Nile 
(which  in  the  Egypt,  itself  is  called /or  [Saiiid.jero , 
Memf hit.  jaro] ;  cf.  Gesen.-Dietr. ,  s.  v.,  ^k"),i8 
here  used  to  designate  the  "great  river  "  Tigris, 
chap.  X.  4.  The  reason  is  probably  to  be  found 
in  the  fact  that  at  an  early  period  "S"".  had 
acquired  a  purely  appellative  signification  = 
iiljn  "njvl,  as  may  appear  from  the  poetic 
use  of  0"''^.'*'^  in  the  sense  of  "channels"  (cf. 
Job  xxviii.  10;  Isa.  xxxiii.  21).  It  is  useless 
for  Hitzig  and  Kranichfeld  to  deny  the  purely 
appellative  use  of  "is"]  in  this  place,  and  to  con- 
tend instead  that  the  Tigris  is  here  termed  the 
Nile  by  way  of  metonymy — from  which  position 
they  deduce  consequences  of  a  more  or  less 
arbitrary  character  ( the  former,  that  this  desig- . 
nation  reveals  that  the  £ingel  who  had  hithrf 
spoken,  and  who  now,  v.  G  et  seq.,  hoveft 
over  the  water,  was  the  giiardian  spirit  of  Egy 
[cf.  on  chap.  x.  5]  and  also  that  the  author  i  - 
the  entire  book  was  of  Egyptian  descent  [!]  ;  the 
latter,  that  "  the  metonymical  co-ordination  •i 
fact  of  the  Nile,  representing  Egypt,  and  the 
Hiddekel,  the  representative  of  the  coming  time 
of  trouble  [?],  was  designed  to  indicate  a  second 
Egyptian  deliverance"*). — Verse  G.  And  one 
said  to  the  taaja  clothed  in  linen,  etc.  The 
subject  of  "l^S*'!  is  certainly  not  "  each  of  the 
two,  the  one  on  this  side  and  one  on  the  other  " 
(Theod.,  Syr.,  Kranichl,  Kliefoth),  but  rather 
only  one  of  them  (D"?!  "in?<7!  Ibn-Ezra),  as  the 
analogy  of  chap.  viii.  13  clearly  suggests,  and 
probably  the  one  nearest  to  the  prophet,  on  the 
same  side  of  the  stream  as  the  latter,  and  the 
only  one  whom  he  could  hear.  This  angel 
represents  the  prophet  himself  in  his  inquiry, 
similar  to  chap.  viii.  13  (cf.  v.  14)  ;  Jerome  ii 
therefore  not  in  the  wrong  to  that  extent,  when 
he  substitutes  "  f J  dixi"  for  "  f <  dij:it  (alter 
eorum)"  without  further  question.  — Which 
upon  (or  "above")  the  waters  of  the  river; 
supply  "stood,"  or  "hovered."  This  hovering 
over  the  waters  of  the  Tigris  denotes  a  new 
position,  which  was  not  meniioned  in  connec- 
tion with  the  former  introduction  and  descrip- 
tion of  the  "man  clothed  in  hnen,"  chap,  x., 
and  with  which  chap.  viii.  IG  is  probably  not  to 

♦  [Keil  (after  Kliefoth )  thus  moderates  the  latter  popition : 
*'  The  nvcr  Hiddekel  (Tigris)  was  a  figure  of  the  Persian 
worid-power,  through  whose  territorj  it  flowed  (cf.  for  the 
prophetic  tyi)€,  Isii.  viii.  6.  7 :  Psa.  c.\xiv.  3.  4),  and  the 
designation  of  the  river  as  "^K*^,  Xile,  contains  an  allusion 

to  the  deliverance  of  Israel  from  the  power  of  Egypt,  whicb 
in  itfi  essence  was  to  he  repeated  in  the  future.'^] 


CHAP.  XII.  1-13. 


205 


be  compared  (see  on  that  passage).     The  fact  j 
that  the  revealing  angel  hovered  over  the  stream 
was  hardly  for  the  mere  purpose  of  placing  him  1 
between  the  two  inquiring  angels  on  its  banks, 
nor  was  it  merelj  designed  to  recall  the  brood- 
ing of  God's  Spirit  over  the  waters,  Gen.  i.  2 
(Hitzig),    but   rather   serves   to   designate    the 
mighty  and  swiftly  flowing  stream  of  the  Tigris 
— as  formerly  the  sea  (chap.  vii.  2) — as  a  symbol 
of    the    surging   world    of   nations  over  which 
'■  the  good  spirit  o£  the  world-power"  exercises 
sway  as  a  beneficent  and  guiding  principle  of  ' 
order  (so  FiiUer,  probably  with  correctness ;  but  , 
he  combines  with  it  the  extremely  forced  hy- 
pothesis that  the  angels  on  the  banks  of  the 
river  were  intended  to  denote  the  two-fold  end 
of  the  world-period,  hence  the  two  manifesta- 
tions of  Christ,   the  first  in  lowliness  and  the 
second  in  glory  !) — How  long  to  the  end  of  the 
wonders?  i.e.,  "when  C"^""?,  here   equiva- 
lent to  ^"tt)  shall  the  end,  the  consummation, 
come  of  the  wondrous  things  foretold  by  thee  ?  " 
The  7P.  is  evidently  that  referred  to  in  v.  1  (cf . 
chap.  xi.  4.5),  and  therefore  different  from  the 
r^~ns«,  "  the  last  end,"  concerning  which  Daniel 
makes  inquiry  in  v.  8.   The  "  wondrous  things  " 
(nsiE)  themselves  are  the  extraordinary  suf- 
ferings and  judicial  punishments,  whose  instru- 
ment Antiochus.  the  Old-Test.  Antichrist,  was  to 
become,   and  which  are   described  at  the  end, 
"  "ginning  with  chap.  xi.  30;   of.  the  similar  use 
j.^^sic:  in  chap.  viii.   2-t;    xi.   30;  and  par- 
.i.tilarly  Isa.  xxix.  14.— Verse  7.  And  he  held 
u.\i  his  right  hand   and   his   left   hand.     The 
raising  of  b'>th  hands  was  designed  to  impart  a 
sc'smn  emphasis  to  the  act  of  taking  the  oath  ; 
cf.  Dent,  xxxii.  40  ;  Ezek.  xx.   5. — And   sware 
by  him  that  liveth  for  ever.    Dbl3'""'na,  cf.  iv. 
31 ;   Deut.  .1.  c,  and  Rev.  x.  6.     "'H  is  an  adjec- 
tive, not  a  substantive,  in  this  place.     Cf.  the 
similar  predicates  connected  with  the  names  of 
heathen  gods  also,  e.g. .  aeiZuoq  iiedr  in  the  iuscrip. 
at   Shakka  (Bnrkhardt,  Beisen,   etc.,   pp.    147, 
503) ;   Rrn'/iimim;  a'lun'j.iioQ  on  the  Rosetta  stone, 
lines  4.  9,  .54.     In  connection  with  the  true  God 
Jehovah,  the  predicate  inrena  in  atcnium  has 
the  profounder  significance,  that  He  not  only 
lives  for  ever,  but  also  fixes  the  limit  of  evil  for 
ever  (Ewald,  on  this  passage). — That  for  a  time, 
times,  and   a  half ;  (.  e. ,  after  a   time,  and  two 
times,  and  a  half  time,  or,  briefly,  after  three 
and  a  h.Tlf  (my.stical  [rather,  literal))  years;   cf. 
on  chap.   vii.   25.     To  this  limitation  of  time, 
wliich  has  become  familiar  from  its  former  occur- 
rence  (cf.  also  chap.   viii.    14;  ix.   27),  is  now 
added  a  further  one,  which,  however,  substan- 
tially coincides  with  it  : — and  when  he  shall 
have  accoii  pLshed  to  scatter  the  power  of 
the  holy  people  ;  rather,  "  and  when  the  scat- 
tering of  a  part  of  the  holy  people  shall  have 
ceased."     No  material  objection  can  be  brought 
to   bear  against  this    exposition   of   the   words 
-■^•^-ZV—\-[  yo:  r-'s:-^,  since  73".  almost  in- 
variably has  the  meaning  '"  to  scatter,  disperse," 
in  tlie  proj)/ietic  usage  (cf.  Isa.  xi.  !2  ;  >Ier.  xiii. 
14;   li.  30,  23),  while  that  of  ■■  break,  shatter," 
seems  to  be  confined  more  particularly  to  poetry 


(cf.  Psa.  ii.  9  ;  cxxxvii.  9),  and  further,  since 
the  rendering  of  T'  by  "part,  division,"  seema 
to  be  adequately  supported  by  parallels  like 
Gen.  xlvii,  24  ;  2  Kings  xi.  7  ;  Neh.  xi.  1.  It  is 
not  necessary,  in  order  to  obtain  this  meaning, 

to  change  the  pointing  so  as  to  read  T?]  ^"I^??! 
-13^,  as  Hitzig  proposes  The  correct  view  is 
represented  by  Bertholdt,  Dereser,  Gesenins, 
Haverniok,  Von  Lengerke,  Ztuidel,  and  substan- 
tially by  Theodot. ,  Vulg. ,  Luther,  etc.,  except- 
ing only  that  the  latter  neglect  to  render  T)  by 
"  part,"  and  either  interpret  it  by  "  might,  war- 
like power, "or  leave  it  altogether  untranslated. 
On  the  other  hand,  Hengstenberg,  Hofmann, 
Maurer,  Auberlen,  Kranichfeld,  IMUer,  Khefoth, 
Ewald,  etc.,  render  :  "  AVhen  the  shattering  of 
the  hand  of  the  holy  people  shall  have  ceased  " 
(i.e.,  when  its  power  shall  have  been  entirely 
broken).  In  support  of  this  view  it  is  usually 
contended  (with  Hofmann,  ll'f/s*.  uiid  Erf.^  I. 
314  et  seq. )  that  the  idea  of  reuniting  the  scat- 
tered Israel,  which  occurs  nowhere  else  in  Daniel, 
would  be  presented  in  this  place  without  any  pre- 
paration whatever.  This  is  as  if  the  cliapter 
under  consideration  did  not  present  a  number  ot 
other  ideas,  which  are  wholly  new  and  have 
never  occurred  previou.sly,  e.g.,  the  prophecy  of 
the  resurrection  in  v.  2  ;  the  shining  of  the  wise 
like  the  brightness  of  the  firmament,  in  v.  3; 
and  also  the  contents  of  v.  10  ;  or  as  if  the  men- 
tion in  this  book  of  the  expectation  that  the  dis- 
persed people  of  God  should  be  reunited,  which 
was  so  familiar  to  the  earlier  prophets,  could  be 
in  any  way  remarkable,  when  taken  in  connec- 
tion with  the  correspondence,  usually  so  thor- 
ough, of  the  range  of  this  prophet's  ideas  with 
that  of  his  predecessors  (cf.  Joel  iii.  5  et  seq. ; 
Am.  ix.  11  et  seq.  :  Isa.  xi.  12  ;  Jer.  li.  20  et 
seq.,  etc.,  etc.).*  It  is  entirely  unnecessary  to 
adopt  the  historical  reference  to  1  JIacc.  v.  23, 
45,  53  et  seq.  ;  2  Mace.  xii.  32,  which  Hitzig  dis- 
covers in  this  passage,  and  regards  as  a  proof 
that  in  this  instance  there  is  another  vatic,  ex 
evcntu.  There  is  not  the  slightest  difficulty, 
however,  connected  with  the  opinion  that  the 
facts  recorded  in  those  passages  of  the  Macca- 
baean  books  (relating  to  the  liringing  back  to 
Judasa  of  the  scattered  Jews  who  lived  in  Gali- 
lee and  Gilead  among  the  heathen,  by  Judas 
and  Simon  Maccabasus),  constituted  a  first  typi- 
cal fulfilment  and  historical  exemplification  of 
the  present  prophecy. f—^ All  this  shall  be  fin- 
ished. •~^^<";2,  not  the  foregoing  words,  but 
the  things  spoken  of,  the  sum  of  the  prophecy 
beginning  with  chap.  xi.  2  (inclusive  of  the  con- 
tents of  chap.  xii.  1-8).  X 

*  [Keil  defends  the  rendering  of  }^SI  hy  shatter,  rather 
than  "scatter,"  and  of  01^3   by  completion,  rather  than 

"  ceaeing ;  "  hut  the  sense  is  not  m.iterially  different  in 
either  case,  if  the  prophecy  refer  to  the  persecution  by 
Antiochus,  for  the  hour  of  striking  for  independence  wai 
coincident  with  that  of  the  deepest  oppression.  The  meta. 
phorical  signification  of  power  for  ~l\  however,  seems  pre- 
ferable as  being  more  usual  and  natural  than  that  of  pari  ; 
and  the  latter  savors  too  much  of  a  diplomat.c  rendering.] 

t  [It  may  reasonably  be  objected  to  tliis  reference  that 
it  is  too  ijetty,  and  requires  too  special  u  rendering  of  the 
words  to  be  of  any  great  valuo.] 

t  [The  "fulfilment  of    all  these  things"  obviously  U 


266 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


Verses  8.  9.  The  propheps  question  concern-  | 
ing  the  final  end,  and  the  angel's  encmiraging  I 
reply.  And  I  heard,  but  I  understood  not, 
namely,  the  information  just  imparted  by  the 
angel,  involving  a  two-fold  designation  of  the  i 
time,  and  also  including  the  statement,  which  [ 
was  especially  incomprehensible  to  the  prophet, 
that  at  the  expiration  of  the  three  and  a  half 
times  the  dispersion  of  a  part  of  Israel  should 
have  reached  its  end. — What  shall  be  the  end 
of  these  things?  i.e.,  "which  event  is  to  be 
the  last  of  these  '  wondrous  things  ? '  "  (v.  6) ; 
by  the  occurrence  of  what  event  shall  it  be  pos- 
sible to  know  that  the  last  end  of  the  entire 
Kcries  of  the  predicted  troubles  and  judgments 
has  been  reached  ? — Hence  the  n"'nns;,  concern- 
ing which  Daniel  now  inquires,  does  not  directly 
coincide  with  the  fp  to  which  the  question  of 
the  angel  in  v.  6  referred,  but  stands  related  to 
■it  as  the  final  point  in  a  course  of  development 
is  related  to  a  final  period  of  extended  duration.  * 
— Verse  9.  And  he  said,  Go  thy  way,  Dan- 
iel, etc.  ~^,  as  in  v.  1.3,  an  encouraging  re- 
mark addressed  to  the  prophet,  who  had  ap- 
proached with  anxious  questioning;  cf.  Ecc.  ix. 
7.  This  parallel  demonstrates,  if  there  were  no 
other  reason,  that  it  is  impossible  to  take  ni.-j 
in  the  sense  of  "to  die,  to  die  peacefully,  to 
lie  down  to  sleep,"  in  this  place,  as  Bertholdt, 
H.T.vernick,  etc.,  propose. — For  the  ivords  are 
closed  up  (or  "concealed")  and  sealed  tUl  •'je 
time  of  the  end.  Cf.  v.  4,  where  Di'C'in, 
"  the  words,"  is  evidently  employed  in  the  same 
sense  as  here,  namely,  as  designating  the  words 
of  the  prophecy,  chap.  xi.  2-xii.  8.  The  state- 
ment th.it  these  words  are  ' '  concealed  and 
sealed  "  till  the  time  of  the  end,  has,  of  course, 
a  different  me.ining  from  the  exhortation  in 
that  pasSiige,  "to  conceal  and  seal"  them. 
While  that  exhortation  was  intended  to  warn 
him  earnestly  against  an  inconsiderate  desire  to 
publish  and  prostitute  to  common  uses  the  state- 
ments of  the  prophecy,  the  present  reference  to 
their  hidden  condition  {i.e.,  to  the  mysterious 
nature  of  the  revealed  facts),  is  designed  to  en- 
courage and  to  lead  to  Jmmble  submis/tion  to  the 
Divine  guidance,  wlime  jyurposes  cannot  at  first  be 
understood,  f  p.  t"i5,  however,  has  no  other  sig- 
nification in  this  place  than  in  v.  4,  or  than  f  p 
in  V.  G.  ]■ 

cxplninpd  by  the  more  definite  statement  in  vers.  11  and  12, 
fnr  the  prophet's  inquiry  was  expressly  in  order  to  elicit 
puch  an  explanation.  This  is  precisely  analogous  to  our 
Lord's  eschiitoliigical  data,  Mfitt.  xxv.  3.1.  etc,  ;  where  the 
nearer  event  alone  is  chruiiolDf^irally  determined,  and  the 
final  one  left  vague  (Matt.  xxv.  3fi).] 

*  [Keil  likewise  distinguishes  between  Vp  and  n*^"inX) 
"  ut  neither  his  nor  the  author's  distinction  seems  to  be  very 
clear  or  well  founded.  In  the  present  instance  rT^irti^ 
seems  to  denote  the  nearer  sequel  of  the  pressing  emergen- 
cies in  immediate  view,  and  "Tp  the  more  distant  consum- 

matifin  of  the  entire  prophecy.  If  so,  the  angel  does  not 
fully  answer  the  inquiry  of  ver.  H,  but  does  Daniel's,  by 
-  desifirnating  only  the  terminus  of  the  Antiochian  history. 
*'  Hitzig  is  altogether  correct  in  thus  stating  the  (latter) 
question  :  '  What,  i.e..  which  event  is  the  uttermost,  the 
last  of  the  risbC,  that  stands  before  the  end  ?  '  "  (Keil).] 

t  [In  like  manner  the  "closing  ard  sealing"  (^rO  and 


Verses  10-12.  Approximate*  determination  cij 
the  final  point  (the  ni";nS)  of  the  predicted  de- 
relopment,  for  the  purpose  of  affording  addi- 
tional comfort  and  encouragement  to  the  pro- 
phet, in  his  anxiety  to  receive  information. 
Many  shall  be  purified  and  made  white,  and 
tried,  rather,  "  shall  purity  and  cleanse  them- 
selves, and  shall  be  thoroughly  tried."  The 
terms  recur  from  chap.  xi.  35,  excepting  that 
they  are  differently  arranged,  and  that  the  two 
leading  verbs,  112  "to  purify,"  and  -(3^  "to 
cleanse,"  are  to  be  taken  in  a  reflexive  sense, 
corresponding  to  the  Hithpael,  while  the  third 
tfYZ  (Niph.)  expresses  the  passive  sense  of  beiug 
thoroughly  tried,  or  of  being  thoroughly  puri- 
fied (cf.  Psa.  xii.  7  ;  Prov.  xxx.  5).  With  each 
of  the  verbs  the  idea  of  svffcring  and  persecut'^or, 
on  account  of  the  faith  is  of  course  again  in- 
volved, as  forming  the  media,  of  purifying. — 
But  the  wicked  shall  do  wickedly.  The  i  in 
^JTi'-jni  is  adversative,  and  serves  to  contrast 
the  conduct  of  the  wicked  in  the  last  time  with 
the  contemporaneous  course  pursued  by  the 
faithful.  Cf.  the  free  rendering  of  the  passage 
in  Rev.  xxii.  11. — And  none  of  the  wicked 
shall  understand ;  but  the  wise  shall  under- 
stand, namely,  what  is  the  meaning  and  ultimat« 
aim  of  the  predictions  relating  to  the  last  time  ; 
consequently  they  shall  then  understand  the 
prophecy,  and  by  its  light  shall  be  able  to  cor- 
rectly interpret  the  signs  of  the  time  (cf.  Matt, 
xxiv.  32  et  seq.  ;  Luke  xxi.  28  et  seq.),  and  ac- 
cordingly, to  act  and  regulate  their  conduct 
with  reference  to  the  salvation  of  their  souls,  f 
— Hitzig  himself  realizes  that  it  would  be  ex- 
ceedingly inappropriate  to  render  D'"i''2"-?3  by 
' '  teachers  "  in  this  passage ;  but  why  should 
he  arbitrarily  refuse  to  assign  to  it  the  meaning 
of  "  understanding  ones,"  which  is  the  only  one 


trn  in  both  cases)  can  be  no  other  here  than  in  ver.  4. 
"But  since,  according  to  ver.  4,  Daniel  himself  must  shut 
up  and  seal  the  book,  the  participles  in  this  clause,  assign- 
ing the  reason  for  "Hj,  cannot  have  the  meaning  of  th* 

perfect,  but  only  ptixte  what  is  or  shall  be  done  ;  shut  ni^- 
they  shall  be  (remain)  till  the  time  of  the  end ;  thus  thej 
only  denote  the  shutting  up  and  sealing,  which  must  be  ac- 
complished by  Daniel The  shuttin.g  up  and  sealing 

....  can  only  consist  in  thLs,  that  the  book  should  be  pre 
served  in  security  against  any  defacement  of  its  contents, 
so  that  it  might  be  capable  of  being  read  at  all  times  dowE 
to  the  time  of  the  end.  and  might  be  used  by  God's  people 
for  the  strengthening  of  their  faith  ;  cf.  ch.  viii.  2ti." — Keil,'] 

*  [It  is  str.mge  that  a  comnient.ator  will  persist  in  calling 
this  an  ''approximate  estimate,"  when  its  sole  object  was 
to  clear  np  uncertainty  as  to  the  duration  of  the  events  in 
prospect,  and  when,  accordingly,  preci.se  periods  of  time 
are  assigned  in  explicit  and  varied  terms.  Surely  the  whole 
subject  is  designedly  left  in  doubt  if  this  language  does 
not  definitely  determine  it.] 

+  [It  is  tiius  true  that  history  in  a  measure  interprets 
prophec.v,  or  rather  enables  the  interpreter  to  give  vivid- 
ness and  detail  to  predictions  in  themselves  general  and 
ob.scm'e.  So  also  seeing  is  better  than  reading  a  descrip- 
tion, however  clear.  But  it  is  not  neces.sary  to  wait  for 
the  accomplishment  of  prophecy  in  order  to  gain  an  intelli- 
gent comprehension  of  its  essential  import.  To  maintain 
this  would  be  equivalent  to  denying  any  intelligible  use  of 
language.  Nor  is  it  true,  as  many  expositors  assert,  that 
Daniel  himself  did  not  understand  these  prophecies.  Ver.  S 
only  menns  that  he  did  not  clearly  sec  the  application  of  tha 
announcement  in  ver.  7  to  the  iireviuus  prophetic  declara 
tions,  especially  the  mode  of  computing  the  note  of  timr 
there  given.  This  point  is  cleared  up  by  the  paiticulai 
Rjiecifications  of  the  present  communication,  and  Daniel  ii 
tlierefore  tlismissed  with  a  peaceful  sense  of  full  intolU 
gence.] 


CHAP.  XII.  1-13. 


267 


that  can  be  admitted  here,  in  the  former  pas- 
sages (xi.  35  ;  3ui.  1),  where  it  is  no  less  appro- 
priate ? — Verse  11.  And  from  the  time  that 
the  daily  sacrifice  shall  he  taken  away,  and 
an  abomination  that  maketh  desolate  set  up, 
there  shall  be  a  thousand  two  hundred  and 
ninety  days.  On  the  construction  of  the  words 
131  ^31n  ~?5''t  which  denote  the  beginning 
of  the  1290  days,  cf.,  e.g.,  chap.  ii.  16;  v.  15  ; 
Ecc.  ix.  1  ;  Jer.  xvii.  10,  etc.  "l?^~,  as  appears 
from  the  following  Ptlb,  which  does  not  depend 
on  t"5  after  the  manner  of  the  genitive,  is  not 
an  iniinitive,  but  a  "  relative  asyndetic  connec- 
tion of  the  prxt.  propheticum  with  C^5."  The  3 
IE  ririb  may  be  regarded  as  "expressing  the 
fateful  purpose  of  God,"  and  therefore  as  tak- 
ing the  place  of  the  jussive  imperfect,  which 
ordinarily  serves  that  purpose  (cf.  xi.  18). — 
The  expression  D^I^  T^P?  is  distinguished 
from  the  synonymous  CQCa  yipffln,  chap.  xi. 
31,  and  also  from  Oaoa  D-^SlpO,  solely  by  its 
^eater  brevity,  which  may  be  indicated  by  the 
combination  ' '  desolating  abomination  "  (cf .  also 
the  substantially  identical  CaiS  5ICSn,  chap. 
*iii  13).*  It  seems  to  be  inadmissible  because 
of  the  substantial  identity  of  the  expression  with 
those  former  parallels,  to  translate  this  passage, 
with  Wieseler  (Die  sidirig  Woehen  etc.,  p.  109) : 
' '  From  the  time  that  the  daily  sacrifice  shall  be 
vaken  away,  tiU  the  (U'M'biting  of  the  abomina- 
tion, i.e.,  till  the  destraction  of  the  idol-altar 
RDd  the  rededication  of  the  temple  by  Judas 
Maccabsus." — It  has  alreatly  been  shown,  on 
chap.  viii.  14,  that  the  1290  days  are  substan- 
tially identical  with  the  half  year-week  (ix.  27), 
or  with  the  three  and  a  half  times  (vii.  25  ; 
xii.  7),  and  that  they  involve  a?i  extension  of 
that  period  hy  nbont  half  a  month  only  (twelve 
to  thirteen  days);  and  it  was  also  shown  on 
that  passage,  that  on  the  other  hand  the  2300 
evening-mornings  or  1,150  days  shorten  the  same 
period  by  about  four  months.  According  to  all 
the  pass-iges  relating  to  the  period  of  three  and 
a  half  years  as  thus  determined  (in  the  one  case 
exceeding  those  years  by  a  few  days,  in  the 
other  falling  below  them  by  a  few  months),  and 
especially  according  to  the  present  passage,  the 
terminus  a  quo  for  that  period  was  the  juncture 
when  the  daily  sacrifice  was  taken  away,  and 
when  the  abomination  of  desolation  was  placed 
in  the  sanctuary.  Our  passage  is  silent  with  re- 
gard to  the  special  termimis  ad  giiem,  which 
had  in  former  passages  been  described  as  coin- 
cident, on  the  one  hand  with  the  judgment  of 
the  wicked  author  of  such  profanation  (chap. 


*  [The  nent  Q?3;r,  however,  is  not  in  itself  synonymous 
with  the  act.  t?3U3^  :  it  here  becomes  equivalent  to  it  only 
Dy  reason  of  the  connection  with  l^^pUJ.  "In  ch.  xi.  31, 
Where  the  subject  spoken  of  is  the  proceedings  of  the  enemy 
causing  desolation,  the  abomination  is  viewed  as  D?2ffi^i 

britiffing  desolation ;  here,  with  reference  to  the  end  of 
those  proceedings"  (rather,  with  reference  to  the  persecuted 
BuflEerers  as  being  profaned  by  it),  "as  U?aC  brought  to 
isolation  ;  cf.  on  cb.  ix.  27  "  C  Keil).] 


vii  86 ;  ix.  27),  and  on  the  other  with  the  re- 
dedication  of  the  profaned  sanctuary  (chap.  viii. 
14) ;  in  other  words,  the  revealing  angel  doe> 
not  precisely  determine  the  final  p&'  it  of  the  last 
time  of  trouble  (the  ^"'10^,  concerning  which 
Daniel  inquired,  v.  8).*  He  affords  an  indica- 
tion, indeed,  that  a  period  of  blessing  should 
ensue  on  the  expiration  of  the  mystical  three 
and  a  half  years,  by  employing  the  beatitude  of 
the  following  verse  :  '"  Blessed  is  he  that  wait- 
eth,"  etc.  ;  but  he  refrains  from  determining 
the  exact  point  of  time  in  which  it  should  be- 
gin. Upon  this  point  his  language  is  even  un- 
decided and  equivocal,  inasmuch  as  he  fixes  the 
hmits  of  the  intervening  time,  at  first  at  1290, 
but  afterwards  at  1335  days — thus  in  the  one 
case  exceeding  the  measure  of  exactly  1277  days 
by  thirteen,  and  in  the  other  by  fifty-eight 
days.  The  troubled  events  of  the  Maccabsean 
period,  which  might  deserve  notice  as  the  points 
of  the  beginning  and  the  end  of  the  historical 
equivalent  of  the  three  and  a  half  years,  do  no 
present  a  satisfactory  reason  for  such  vacillat- 
ing predictions ;  for  the  exact  period  required 
cannot  be  found  in  that  epoch,  however  its  lim- 
its may  be  fixed.  E.g.,  if,  with  Bertholdt. 
Hiivemick,  Von  Lengerke,  et  al.,  its  conclusion 
is  assigned  to  the  day  of  rededicating  the  tem- 
ple by  Judas  Maccabajus,  or  the  25th  Chisleu 
(Dec.  loth)  of  the  year  B.C.  164  (1  Mace.  iv.  52), 
and  the  1290  days  are  reckoned  backward  from 
that  date,  their  beginning  wUl  fall  on  June  10th, 
B.C.  167,  or  more  than  five  and  a  half  months 
earlier  than  the  event  which  is  generally  re- 
garded as  marking  the  commencement  of  the 
three  and  a  half  years  (i.e.,  earlier  than  the 
abrogation  of  the  daily  sacrifice  on  the  15th 
Chisleu,  167  ;  cf.  1  Mace.  i.  54) ;  nor  will  that 
reckoning  consist  with  the  arrival  in  Jerusalem 
of  ApoUonius,  the  commissioner  of  taxes,  which 
might  possibly  be  regarded  as  the  introductory 
event  of  the  period  in  question  ;  for  according 
to  1  Mace.  i.  29,  his  arrival  took  place  only 
about  three  months  prior  to  the  15th  Chisleu, 
167,  instead  of  5th  (cf,  supra,  on  chap.  vii.). 
Further,  the  attempt  to  regard  the  Maccabsean 
dedication  of  the  temple  as  the  characteristic 
fact  that  marked  the  conclusion  of  the  1290 
days,  is  antagonized  by  the  circumstance  that 
the  troubles  of  the  Jews  had  by  no  means 
reached  their  end  at  that  time,  since  the  dread- 
ful tyrant  Antiochus  yet  Uved,  the  citadel  of 
Zion  was  still  garrisoned  by  enemies,  their  leader, 
Lysias,  who  had  gone  to  Antioch,  was  employed 
in  making  prepaiation  for  farther  extensive 
operations,  in  order  to  wipe  out  the  shame  of 
his  former  defeat  by  Judas,  and,  in  addition, 
the  Ammonites,  Edomites,  and  othey  heathen 
neighbors  threatened  the  little  band  of  Jews 
led  by  the  Maccabees  with  dangerous  attacks 
(cf.  1  Mace.  iv.  as,  41  ;  v.  1  et  seq.  ).f  If  we 
assume,  with  Hitzig,  Bleek,  Hofmann,  Delitzsch, 

*  [After  the  precise.designation  of  the  terminus  ad  quern 
in  the  passage  which  our  author  last  refers  to,  there  seemed 
to  the  prophet,  or  rather  to  his  angelic  in^itrnctor,  no  neeU 
of  its  repetition  here.  Every  reader  would  spontaneously 
understand  the  period  in  question,  dating  from  an  idola- 
trous installation,  to  continite  till  the  removal  of  the  offen- 
sive and  impious  object.  It  is  evidently  the  term  of  the 
sacrilege.] 

t  [It  ought  to  be  observed,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  1,290 
days  are  not  assigned  as  the  limit  of  the  troubles,  but  onljf 
of  the  profanation.} 


268 


THE  PROPHET  DAISTIEL. 


Fiiller,  etc..  that  the  (tenth  of  Epiphanea,  which 
took  place  somewhat  later  than  the  dedication 
of  the  temple,  ended  the  1290  days,  we  are  met 
by  the  difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  date  of  his 
death,  which  has  not  been  preserved  by  any 
historical  authorities  that  have  descended  to  our 
times,  and  for  that  reason  cannot  be  definitely 
settled.  That  Epiphanes  died  precisely  140 
days  lifter  the  dedication  of  the  temple,  is  a 
mere  assumption  of  Hitzig,  Bleek,  etc..  based 
on  a  comparison  of  the  1150  days  of  chap.  viii. 
14, — which,  it  is  asserted,  extend  exactly  to  the 
dedication — with  the  1290  days  of  the  present 
passage.  This  a.ssumption  appears  the  more 
uncertain,  in  proportion  as,  on  the  one  hand,  it 
becomes  impossible  to  exactly  accommodate 
those  1 1 50  day s  between  the  desecration  of  the 
temple  and  the  ascertained  date  of  its  rededica- 
tion  (cf.  on  chap.  viii.  14),  and  as,  on  the  other 
hand,  it  becomes  difScult  to  reconcile  the  date 
of  the  death  of  Antiochiis,  as  thus  assumed, 
with  historical  statements  respecting  his  end 
which  have  been  preserved  to  us.*  We  are 
accordingly  compelled  to  abandon  every  attempt 
to  demonstrate  an  exact  correspondence  between 
the  time  indicated  in  the  text  and  the  periods 
of  the  JIaccabajan  fera  of  persecution ,  and  to  re- 
main content  with  the  hypothesis  that  the  1290 
days  have  a  merely  mystical  and  symbolical  signi- 
ficance, f  The  merely  approximate  character  of 
the  correspondence  between  the  prophetic  meas- 
urement of  time  and  the  chronological  relations 
of  the  history  of  its  typical  realization,  with 
which  we  were  obliged  to  content  ourselves  in 
a  former  in.stance,  in  connection  with  the  1150 
days,  returns  here  in  a  somewhat  different  man- 
ner. In  that  instance  we  found  a  considerable 
minus  in  comparison  with  the  number  1277,  and 
here  a  smaller  plm.X  It  wiU  scarcely  become 
possible  to  ever  assign  a  more  definite  reason 


*  The  precarious  character  of  all  combinations  bearing  on 
this  question  may  appear  from  the  following  calculation  by 
Hitzig  (p.  aas  et  seq.) :  "  .  ...  Antiochus  (1  Mace.  i.  10) 
ascended  the  throne  in  the  year  1S7  x.  Sel.,  .nnd  he  died  (1 
Mace.  vi.  l(i)  in  ihe  year  149 ;  consequently  his  reign  falls 
between  April,  B.C.  ITft  and  March,  l&j.  Uut  we  possess  a 
y>\n  of  Seleueus  bearing  the  number  of  the  year  PAZ  (see 
Eckhel,  DoLtr.  uum.^  III.  2".i2),  which  shows  mat  Seleueus 
=till  reifined  at  least  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  quarter  of 
B.C.  ITli.  Antiochus  became  king  during  the  mouth  of  Oc- 
y^ber,  176,  .it  the  earliest ;  and  it  he  reigned  not  quite  twelve 
years,  according  to  Appian,  Xi/r.,  c.  H6,  we  may  perhaps 
regard  the  eleven  years  1T5-Ib5  as  being  full,  and  obtain,  in 
ad»itiou.  the  fraction  of  the  twelfth  year  by  including  a 
remnant  of  176  possibly,  and  certainly  by  adding  the  ftrst 
.nonths  of  161  (at  !e:ist  as  far  as  April).  Accordingly  if,  as 
ve  believe,  the  author  referred  in  v.  11  to  the  death  of  An- 
riochus  as  the  end  of  the  period,  it  follows  that  the  latter 
died  141)  davs  after  the  dedication  of  the  temple  (see  on 
viii.  14),  on'  the  tifteenth  to  eighteenth  day  of  the  second 
month  149  (Jewish),  i.e.,  ou  the  thirteenth  of  the  eighth 
.Tlonth  (Artemisius)  148  Sel.  This  result  harmonizes  e-xcel- 
.ently  with  that  coin,  and  also  with  Appian  (.').  On  the 
otiier  hand,  when  Eusebius  (Chron.  i.  ;i4S)  assigns  eleven 
years  to  the  reign  of  Antiochus,  from  Olymp.  151,  3,  to 
Olymp.  154.  1,  or  from  B.C.  174  to  164,  there  is  an  error, 
not  only  with  respect  to  the  point  of  depirture,  but  also 
with  regard  to  the  end,  since  the  death  of  the  king  trans- 
pired during  the  second  half  of  the  Olympiad  ;  Antiochus 
died  in  Olymp.  153,  4."  Bleek  ventures  a  sunilar  ealcula- 
tloi  {Ttteijliiii.  ieilKlir..  p.  293  et  seq. ),  in  which  the  words 
'■  perhaps,  probably,  I  believe,"  occur  suspiciously  often. 

t  [But  this  convenient  refuge  of  the  puzzled  expositor  is 
rut  olf  by  the  repeated  and  varied  form  of  the  numbers  so 
absolutely  given.  If  all  was  symbolical,  why  these  changes, 
<»ud  why  these  jtarticnlar  numbersyj 

•  [This  excess  or  dcflciency  is  occasioned  by  the  errone- 
ous interpretation  of  the  "2300  evening-mornings"  as 
being  1150  days  (cf.  on  ch.  viii.  14),  and  by  taking  the 
three  and  a  half  veara  too  strictly.] 


for  this  two-fold  discrepancy  than  that  the 
seer's  attention  was  to  be  emphatically  called  tc 
the  ripproximnlioa  of  the  designation  of  time. 
Cf.  Kranichfeld  also.  p.  413.  who  justly  observes 
in  opposition  to  the  artificial  attempts  to  ascer- 
tain the  exact  historical  grounds  for  the  differ- 
ence between  the  1150  and  1290  days,  which  be 
adduces,  that  "it  is,  moreover,  an  assertioii 
which  can  never  be  exegetically  establi.shed, 
that  the  deliverance  of  the  nation,  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  foe.  and  the  restoration  of  the  order 
of  worship  are  everywhere  in  this  book  regarded 
as  separate  in  time.  On  the  contrary,  they 
designate  the  same  juncture  of  time  at  the  end, 
as  seen  in  the  prophet's  perspective,  which 
appears  from  their  indiscriminate  application, 
or  in  other  words,  from  the  substitution  of  one 
for  another;  cf.  vii.  25  with  26;  viii.  14  with 
25  et  seq.;   ix.  24  with  26,  27  ;  xi.  45  with  xii. 

1 For  the  rest,  the  profanation  of  the 

temple  which  an  Antiochus  Epiphanes  imposed 
on  Israel  during  three  years,  continues  to  be  a 
historical  exemplification  of  the  facts  revealed 
to  Daniel's  prophetic  vision,  in  the  face  of  the 
1290  days,  and  despite  the  fact  that  in  the  na- 
ture of  the  case  it  accords  but  relatirdy  witli 
them  in  a  formal  aspect. "  * — Verse  1 2.  Blessed 
is  he  that  waiteth  (or  '•  is  steadfast  to  the 
end")  and  cometh  to  the  thousand  three  hun- 
dred and  five  and  thirty  days.  In  view  of 
its  connection  with  the  foregoing,  the  meaning 
of  this  exclamation  can  only  be  as  follows  : 
"After  1290  days  have  expired,  the  tribula- 
tion .shall  end  ;  it  shall  not  be  completely  ended, 
however,  until  forty-five  additional  days  (one 
and  a  half  months)  have  elapsed,  hence,  until  a 
total  of  1335  days  has  been  reached."  Here 
again  we  believe  ourselves  obliged  to  rest  satis- 
fied with  finding  a  symbolic  and  approximate 
value  in  the  relation  of  the  several  numbers  to 
each  other  ;  cf.  the  remarks  on  this  point  in  a 
former  connection,  Eth.-fimd.  principles,  etc., 
on  chap.  viii.  No.  1.  Among  the  various  at- 
tempts that  have  been  made  to  explain  with 
historical  accuracy  the  difference  of  forty-five 
days  between  the  time  fixed  by  v.  11  and  that 
given  in  v.  12,  none  have  succeeded  in  realizing 
an  entirely  satisfactory  result:  e.g.,  (1)  that  of 
Hitzig,  based  on  the  assumption  that  the  1335 
days  extend  to  the  reception  from  Tabje  of  the 
tidings  respecting  the  death  of  Antiochus,  forty- 
five  (?)  days  subsequent  to  his  demise ;  (2)  tha 


*  fit  seems  to  ns  that  the  following  explanations  of  Stu- 
art fairly  and  sufficiently  meet  the  difficulties  or  "dis- 
crepancies" raised  by  the  author:  '-The  1290  days  are 
more  specific  than  the  phra-^e.  ■  time,  times  and  a  half,'  in 
ver.  7,  and  also  in  vii.  25.  The  latter  ('  time.'  etc.)  is,  as  it 
were,  a  round  number,  three  and  a  half  first  equalling  the 
one  halt  of  the  sacred  number  seven,  and  the  fractional 
part  equalling  the  half  of  one  year.  In  snch  a  case  minute 
exactness  of  course  is  not  to  be  expected.  But  the  thirty 
additional  days  here  (over  1260  days  =  forty-two  months  = 
three  and  a  half  years)  are  doubtlef,s  designed  as  an  exact 
account  of  time  ilurmg  which  the  detestable  (desolatirgi 
abomination  continued  in  the  temple.  The  terminux  a  quu 
is  the  time  when  Antiochus  first  removed  the  daily  sacrifice, 
which  probably  was  near  the  end  of  May  or  at  the  beginning 
of  June  in  B.C.  168.  Judas  llaccabajus  removed  this 
f^p™!  and  purified  the  temple,  Dec.  26th  of  B.C.  165, 
making  the  time  in  question,  i.e.,  three  and  a  half  years,  aa 
nearly  as  historv  will  enable  ns  to  compute  it.  There  can 
harilly  be  room  "for  doubt  that  the  statement  in  our  text  1« 
minut<'ly  correct.  The  work  of  Judas  there  is  th«  urmi 
nU8  ad  quern  of  the  period  in  question."] 


CHAP.  XIL  1-13. 


269 


assamption  of  Fuller,  that  the  loth  Xanthicus 
(April)  of  the  year  B.C.  164  ('■),  when  a  letter 
from  Antiochus  V.  Eupator  to  the  Jews  reached 
Jerusalem,  aceording  to  2  Mace.  xi. ,  fl-hich  con- 
tained the  welcome  proffer  of  peace,  marks  the 
end  of  the  1335  days;  and  (3)  the  theory  of 
Bertholdt,  Havernick.  Von  Lengerke,  Wieseler, 
etc, ,  that  while  the  1290  days  extended  to  the 
dedication  of  the  temple,  the  1335  days  reached 
down  to  the  death  of  Antiochus,  forty-five  days 
afterward.  Against  the  latter  opinion  it  may 
be  objected  that  the  interval  between  the  dedi- 
cation of  the  temple  and  the  death  of  Antiochus 
was  unquestionably  longer  than  forty-five  days  ; 
or,  in  other  words,  that  Epiphanes  did  not  die 
as  early  as  the  month  of  Shebat  in  the  year  148 
£B.  Sel.,  as  those  scholars  (including  Wieseler  in 
Herzog's  Real-Jiitci/khp.,  I.  387,  Art.  Antiochus) 
assume,  in  contradiction  of  1  Mace.  vi.  10  (cf. 
also  Hitzig,  p.  220,  and  FuUer,  p.  357  et  seq.  ).* 
The  two  former  theories,  on  the  other  hand,  are 
open  to  the  objeotion  that  the  reception  of  the 
news  from  Tabae  of  the  king's  death,  and  also 
of  the  offers  of  peace  from  Antioch,  were  events 
of  far  too  little  importance  to  lead  the  writer 
(whether  prophesying  tx  ecoitu,  or  by  virtue  of 
a  disclosure  of  the  future  from  God)  to  assign 
to  either  of  them  the  dignity  of  marking  the 
fiual  conclusion  of  aU  troubles.  The  letter 
from  Eupator  was  merely  an  offer  of  peace,  and 


*  [The  author  is  far  too  positive  concerning  the  irrecon- 
cilabiUty  of  this  period  with  the  lieath  of  .\ntiochus,  as  the 
following  comjiutation  by  Stuart  will  suffice  to  show ;  "  It 
appears  from  chap.  .\i.  40—^4  above,  that  Antiochus  made 
another  and  final  invasion  of  EfTypt.  near  the  close  of  his 
life,  after  which  he  marched  against  Palestine.  Mattathias 
and  his  sons,  in  the  mean  time,  had  been  organizing  the 
party  of  the  pious,  and  Antiochus  was  e.xceetlingly  mdig- 
nant  at  the  efforts  which  they  made  anil  the  success  with 
which  ihoy  were  attended.  In  1  Mace.  ii.  2G-37,  we  have 
au  account  of  the  situation  of  Antiochus  while  in  the 
'glorious  land.'  His  treasury  was  empty.  He  had  already 
robbed  the  temple  of  all  which  it  contained  that  was  of  any 
value,  and  he  was  necessitated  to  look  to  another  quarter. 
He  left  half  of  his  army,  therefore,  with  Lysias,  one  of  his 
favorite  officers,  and  passed  over  the  Euphrates  in  order  to 
ritle  the  countries  of  the  East.  First  he  went  through  and 
subdued  Armenia  (ra^  knavm  \topai^  V.  37),  and  then  turned 
off  to  rob  the  temple  at  Elymais,  where  he  met  nith  dis- 
grace, and  finally  with  death.  Not  long  aft«r  the  departure 
of  Antiochns  Lysias  began  the  contest  in  Palestine  in 
Berious  earnest ;  but  Judas  uniformly  triumphed  in  all  his 
encounters ;  and  so  decisive  was  one  of  them  over  Lysias, 
that  Judas  proceeded  to  purify  the  temple  and  to  restoie  its 
worship,  1  Mace.  iv.  36  seq.  All  this  must  have  occupied 
some  months ;  .and  the  consecration  of  the  temple  took 
place  the  2")th  of  Dec.  165  B.C.  Of  course  Antiochus  had 
had  sulhcient  time  for  his  conquest  in  Armenia  and  for  his 
advance  to  Elymais  before  the  winter  had  far  advanced. 
It  was  in  early  spj-ing  that  he  undertook  the  robbery  of  the 
temple  in  Elymais ;  after  which,  on  his  retreat,  the  news 
met  him  of  total  defeat  in  Palestine,  and  helped  to  increase 
the  malady  under  which  he  was  then  laboring.  In  1  Mace. 
vi,  1  seq.,  is  an  account  of  the  close  of  the  life  of  .\ntiochus, 
aud  of  bis  failure  at  Elymais.  If  we  now  count  onward, 
fl'om  the  consecration  of  the  temple  by  Judas  to  the  time 
when  Antiochus  deceased,  we  shall  perceive  at  once  that 
the  period  of  l-i33  days  is  in  all  probability  the  period  of 
Antiochus'  death.  From  the  time  that  the  daily  burnt-offer- 
ing was  removed  by  ApoUonius,  at  the  command  of  An- 
tiochus, to  the  time  of  the  reconsccration,  were  ISiH).  From 
the  same  iermiiius  a  quo  to  the  death  of  Antiochus  were 
1335  days,  i.e.,  forty-five  days  more  than  is  included  in 
the  preceding  period.  History  has  not  anywhere  recorded 
the  precise  day  of  Antiochus'  death ;  so  that  we  cannot 
compare  the  passage  before  us  with  that.  But  we  are  cer- 
tain as  to  the  order  of  events,  and  as  to  the  season  of  the 
year,  as  well  as  the  year  itself,  in  which  the  death  of  this 
king  took  place.  Of  the  general  accuracy  there  can  be  no 
doubt ;  and  such  are  the  chronological  designations  of  this 
book  that  we  mry  safely  rely,  in  this  case,  on  its  minute 
•curacy."] 


and  not  the  peace  itself  ;  and  at  the  time  both 
of  its  arrival  and  of  the  tidings  from  Tabse,  the 
horizon  of  Juda3a  was  far  too  dark  to  enable  a 
pseudo-Daniel,  writing  at  that  day,  to  an- 
nounce the  end  of  all  the  sufferings  of  his  na- 
tion a.s  having  already  arrived,  or  as  being 
immediately  at  hand  (cf.  1  Mace.  iv.  35;  vi.  17 
et  seq.),  on  the  ground  merely  that  such  mes- 
sages had  been  received.  The  mode  of  escape 
from  the  difficulty  that  is  adopted  by  Kirmss, 
Bleek,  Delitzsch,  et  al. ,  is  however  still  more 
questionable  than  the  reference  of  the  1385  days 
to  any  of  the  events  that  were  adduced  in  sup- 
port of  the  foregoing  theories.  It  assumes  that 
some  other  fact  of  an  encouraging  nature, 
which  is  no  longer  found  in  our  historical  docu- 
ments, formed  the  tenninus  ad  qacia  of  the 
1335  days  of  the  prophet ;  and  is  clearly  nothing 
more  than  an  expedient  prompted  by  embar- 
rassment and  helpless  di.scouragement,  which 
feelings  our  theory  of  the  merely  symbolic  value 
of  the  designation  of  time  serves  to  justify  bet 
ter  than  any  other  hypothesis.  Cf.  Kliefoth, 
p.  514  :  "  In  extending  this  period  of  121)0  da.Ta 
by  forty-five,  the  design  probabl.v  was  merely 
to  indicate  that  whoever  should  live  in  patience 
and  religious  faith  beyond  the  1200  days,  i.e., 
beyond  the  death  of  the  wicked  oppressor  An- 
tiochus, should  be  accounted  blessed.  The 
forty-five  days  are  mentioned  for  the  purpose 
merely  of  expressing  that  idea  of  surviving,  and 
the  form  of  the  expression  was  governed  solely 
by  a  desire  to  retain  the  analogy  of  v.  11."  Also 
Kranichfeld,  p.  416  :  "  The  period  of  final  con- 
flict which  leads  to  the  victory  is  here  described , 
as  being  very  brief,  comparatively,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  comforting  and  encotu'aging  the  pious 
ones  ;  it  is  not  measured  by  years,  but  merely 
by  fractious  of  months.  The  half  of  a  cycle  of 
three  months  here  takes  the  place  of  the  limited 
period  in  the  mind  of  the  writer,  according  to 
ix.  26  ;  vui.  25,  etc.  ;  and  by  the  arithmetical 
measurement  of  time  by  days  which  is  current 
in  this  book,  it  obtains  the  forty-five  days  which 
lie  outside  of  the  period  of  1290  days  or  three 
and  a  half  times,'"  etc.  Cf.  also  the  Eth. -fund, 
principles.  No.  2. 

Verse  13.  Concluding  fxfiortation  and  pi'mni.se. 
But  go  thou  thy  way  (rather,  "  on  ")  till  the 
end.  '"IPS*],  properly,  "and  thou,"  with  con- 
clusive -,,  but  which  may  also  be  taken  in  an 
adversative  sense,  because  it  leads  over  from  the 
foregoing  to  the  close  in  an  encouraging  manner. 
Ti?.^  "H^.  is  of  course  to  be  understood  according 
to  the  analogy  of  v.  9  :  "go  on,  toward  the  final 
point  of  the  predicted  events;"  not  "go  thy 
way  "  (Hitzig),  nor  yet  "go  toward  iliy  end" 
(Havernick,  Fiiller,  Kliefoth,  etc.),  for  7P.  is 
clearly  shown  by  the  article  to  refer  to  the  same 
end  as  that  mentioned  in  v.  9. — For  thou  shalt 
rest  and  stand  in  thy  lot  at  the  end  of  the 
days;  i.e.,  thou  shalt  rest  in  the  grave,  in  the 
quiet  sleep  of  death  (cf.  Isa.  Ivii.  2,  and  supra, 
V.  2).  The  meaning  is,  "  that  thou  mavest  rest, 
and  enter  on  thy  lot,"  etc..  i.e.,  that  thou  may- 
est  receive  thy  portion  of  the  inheritance  at  the 
judgment  of  eternal  recompense;  cf.  chap.  vii. 
18,  27  ;  Rev.  x.x.  6.  The  thought  refers  back 
undeniably  to  vs.  2,  3,  hence  to  the  jSIess-ianic 
recompense,  of  which  Daniel  also  should  par- 


270 


THE  PBOPHET  DANIEL. 


take,  and  a  majority  of  interpreters  recognize 
that  fact ;  but  they  generally  pervert  the  mean- 
ing of  T^yril,  so  as  to  malte  it  apply  to  the 
resurrection  (standing  up)  for  the  purpose  of 
being  thus  recompensed.  The  correct  view  in 
this  respect  is  advocated,  e.(j.,  by  Ewald,  Kamp- 
hausen,  Kranichfeld,  etc. — Hitzig's  interpreta- 
tion is  very  flat  and  exceedingly  forced  (in  par- 
tial imitation  of  Grotius  and  Dathej  :  "  And 
thou,  go  on  to  the  goal,  and  thou  mayest  be 
content  (!),  and  attend  to  thy  oiiice  (!)  for  the 
end  of  days." — ["  ^'^'13,  lot,  of  the  inheritance 
divided  to  the  Israelites  by  lot,  referred  to  the 
inheritance  of  the  saints  in  Ught  (Col.  i.  12), 
which  shall  be  possessed  by  the  righteous  after 
the  resurrection  from  the  dead  in  the  heavenly 
Jerusalem.  D^tt'l'n  7pb,  to  =  at  the  end  of  the 
days,  i.e.,  not  =  d^Jp^T  riins,  in  the  Mes- 
sianic (rather  Antiochian)  time,  but  in  the  last 
days,  when,  after  the  judgment  of  the  world, 
the  kingdom  of  glory  shall  appear.- — Well  shall 
it  be  for  us  if  in  the  end  of  our  days  we  too  are 
able  to  depart  hence  with  such  consolation  of 
hope  !  " — Keil.] 

ETUICO-FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES  BELATED 
TO  THE  HISTORY  OF  SALVATION,  APOLO- 
GETICAL  REMARKS,  AND  HOMILETICAL 
SUGGESTIONS. 

1.  The  fundamental  dogmatic  thought  that  is 
I  especially  prominent  in  this  closing  section  is 
the  future  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  their 
eternal  destiny,  as  predicted  in  vs.  1-3,  and  as 
again  repeated  and  confirmed  in  the  closing 
words  of  V.  13.  That  in  the  meaning  of  the 
book  this  resurrection  is  not  to  be  regarded  as 
confined  to  Israel  only,  but  rather  as  universal 
in  its  scope,  has  been  shown  in  the  remarks  on 
v.  2.  It  remains  only  to  briefly  answer  the  im- 
portant question  respecting  the  relation  of  that 
prediction  to  the  Maccab^an  age,  which  prima- 
rily aiforded  a  typical  and  preliminary  realiza- 
tion only  of  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  in  general. 
Is  it  necessary,  for  in.stance,  to  take  the  entire 
prophecy  in  a  fgiirative  sense,  as  Dereser  does, 
and  to  apply  it  merely  to  a  spiritual  or  national 
resurrection  of  the  nation  from  its  former  con- 
dition of  apparent  helplessness  and  death  ?  * 
Or  are  we,  with  Bertholdt,  Hitzig,  and  the 
remaining  rationalistic  exegetes,  to  charge  the 
prophet  with  having  committed  a  gross  error, 
in  conceiving  of  the  end  of  the  world,  the  resur- 
rection, and  the  judgment  as  immediately  con- 
sequent on  the  death  of  Ant.  Epiphanes  ? — 
Neither  of  the  two  would  be  coixect ;  on  the 
contrary,  we  are  again  reminded  of  the  perspec- 
tive character  of  prophetic  vision  in  this  connec- 
tion, according  to  which  the  interval  between 
the  preliminary  and  the  ultimate  end  was  over- 
looked, from  the  point  of  view  occupied  by  the 

*  Cf.  Dcrecer  on  the  passage  1  "  ilany  Israelites  who  hved 
during  the  persecution  ....  in  rocky  caverns,  where  the 
dead  were  bestowed,  or  who  peenied  to  lie  in  the  dust  like  a 
lifuleascorpee,  ahfcll,  ^oto  jpeajc,  awake  to  renewed  life  through 
the  goodness  and  powei-  cf  G-jd,  and  shall  perform  actions 
hy  which  they  shall  lJ7e  forever  iu  history.     On  the  other 

hand,  ^he  apostate  Jews shulJ  be  branded  with  ever- 

lasting  sba'ne.^* 


prophesying  seer  long  before  either  came  t< 

pass.  By  virtue  of  this  perspective  vision,  the 
Old-Test,  and  the  New-Test.  Antichrifits  become 
one,  which  is  true  also  of  all  the  circumstancea 
and  results  connected  with  their  appearance. 
'■  As  Antiochus  became  a  type  of  Antichiist,  so 
the  oppression  of  the  Old-Test,  community  of 
God's  people  by  him  became  a  type  of  the  op- 
pression of  the  New- Test,  congregation  of  the 
people  of  God  by  the  latter.  And  as  little  as  it 
surprises  us  that  Joel  iii.  1  et  seq.  should  make 
the  preliminary  signs  of  the  end  follow  imme- 
diately upon  the  pouring  out  of  God's  Spirit, 
with  which  the  last  world-period  begins,  without 
remarking  the  period  intervening  between  them ; 
or  as  easily  as  we  can  explain  the  fact  that  Amoa 
is.  should  predict  the  restoration  of  the  fallen 
tabernacle  of  David  and  the  final  return  of  Israel 
to  its  native  land,  immediately  after  the  judg- 
ment which  he  denounces  upon  the  nation,  thua 
overlooking  the  whole  of  the  immense  period  in 
the  course  of  which  Israel  indeed  returned  to  ita 
country,  but  was  a  second  time  expelled  ty  the 
Romans  ;  or  as  little  as  we  charge  untruthful- 
ness upon  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  when,  in  chap, 
xxxvi. ,  he  announces  to  the  moimtains  of  Israel 
the  future  return  of  the  nation,  and  adds  that 
God  would  show  greater  kindness  to  them  than 
ever  before,  because  this  was  not  fulfilled  on 
their  first  return ;  or  as  natural  as  we  find  it 
that  in  chap.  xi.  Isaiah  should  connect  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  glory  and  peace  of  Christ's  kingdom, 
which  shall  only  be  realized  at  His  second  com- 
ing, with  the  words,  ''  there  shall  come  forth  a 
rod  out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse,"  which  are  regard- 
ed as  bearing  on  the  appearance  of  Christ  in. 
lowliness,  thus  viewing  Christ's  first  and  second 
advents  together  ;  so  little  should  it  surprise  us 
or  seem  incompatible  with  the  nature  of  pro- 
phecy, that  the  present  prediction  should  repre- 
sent the  Seleucid  persecution  as  being  imme- 
diately followed  by  the  full  and  final  deliverance 
of  the  nation,  without  observing  that  a  long 
series  of  years  intervenes  between  the  two.  .  .  . 
Call  it  prophetic  limitation,  or  whatever  else  we 
will,  it  is  nevertheless  the  manner  of  the  pro- 
phets ;  and  the  fact  that  we  find  it  exemplified 
in  the  present  instance  is  to  us  an  evidence  that 
the  prophecy  is  genuine.  Why  do  its  opponents 
neglect  to  show  how  the  prophecy  respecting  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  immediately  after  the  de- 
cease of  Antiochus  can  be  reconciled  ^vith  their 
view  concerning  the  composition  of  the  book  ? 
If  it  was  written  immediately  before  the  death  of 
Antiochus,  what  was  there  to  excite  the  hope 
that  the  time  of  blessing  and  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead  should  follow  immediately  afterward  ? 
And  if  it  was  felt  that  such  a  hope  was  war- 
ranted, and  it  was  7iot  realised,  were  men  not 
deceived  ?  Who  would  have  attached  further 
value  to  such  a  mistaken  prophecy  '? — But  if  it 
was  composed  after  the  death  of  Antiochus,  it 
becomes  whoUy  inconceivable  that  the  false  pri/phet 
slimdd  have  compromised  his  pretended  projyhecy 
by  THIS  conchision.  But  the  features  that  are 
inconceivable  on  the  presumption  that  the  pro- 
phecy is  spurious,  are  readily  explained  on  the 
view  that  it  was  the  actual  Daniel  who  prophe- 
sied thus,  centuries  before  Antiochus.  The 
truth  of  his  prophecy  was  in  that  case  so  incon- 
testably  assured  in  the  time  of  Antiochus,  that 


CHAP.  XII.  1-13. 


^71 


the  apparent  failure  of  its  prediction  concerning 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  (or,  more  properly, 
the  delay  of  its  fulfilment)  was  no  longer  suffi- 
cient to  cast  a  doubt  upon  it.     In  one  word,  this 
passage  of  our  book,  usually  considered  so  diffi- 
cult, is  so  little  worthy  to  be  regarded  as  the 
heel  of  Achilles  in  the  case,  that  it  rather  con- 
stitutes its  .<itrength,  before  which  its  assailants 
are  put  to  shame"  (Fuller,  p.  343  et  seq.). — It 
should,  however,  be  observed  in  this  connection 
that  the  leading  idea  in  the  prophecy  in  vs.  1-3 
is  not  the  prediction  of  the  resurrection,  but 
rather  the  universal  and  eternal  recompense  to  be 
meted  out  to  them.     The  rising  of  the  many 
"  sleepers  in  the  dust  of  the  earth."  as  predicted 
in  V.  2,  is  at  bottom  a  mere  auxiliary  thought, 
or  a  preparation  for  the  principal  feature  of  the 
prophecy,  consisting  in  the  promise  of  everlast- 
ing life  to  the    pious,  and    the  denouncing  of 
everlasting  shame  and  torment  upon  the  wicked. 
Inasmuch  as  the  judgment  upon  the  Old-Test. 
Antichrist,  as  foretold  in  a  former  passage  (chap, 
xi.  45',  forms,  in  a  measure,  the  opening  act 
and  point  of  commencement  of  this  great  recom- 
pensing judgment,  all  subsequent  instances  of 
such  judgment  must  appear  as  a  continued  series 
of  displays  of  the  Divine  righteousness,  whose 
final  conclusion  at  the  last  judgment  wUl  consti- 
tute the  highest  and  most  perfect,  but  not  the 
only  fulfilment  of  this  prophetic  passage.  Among 
such  displays  of  God's  justice  may  be  reckoned 
the  end  of  the  tyrant  Herod  and  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans,  the  subjugation  of 
the  Eastern  churches  by  Islamism  and  the  over- 
throw of  the  Middle-age  Papal  church  by  the 
Reformation. — As  the   eternal   recompense,   so 
the  awaking  of  the  dead,  which  forms  its  sub- 
stratum and  preliminaiy  condition,  reaches  far 
into  the  history  of   time  and  earth,  extending 
itself  close  to  the  historical  position  of  our  pro- 
phet, even  though  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  first  fruits 
of  them  that  sleep,  began  the  blessed  series  of 
those  who  shall  have  a  part  in  the  "  resurrec- 
tion of  the  just"  (Luke  xiv.  14  ;  sx.  36;   1  Cor. 
XT.  20  et  seq.),  and  though,  consequently.  He 
was  the  first  who  could  say  with  entire  truth, 
"  The  hour  is  coming,  and  now  is,  when  the 
dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Sou  of  God  ;  and 
they  that  hear  him  shall  live  "  (John  v.  25  ;  cf. 
vs.  28,  29).     Both  the  preliminary  judgment  of 
the  world,  which  is  transpiring  in  the  events  of 
history,  and  the  ethical  resurrection  in  Christ 
Jesus  of  the  spiritually  dead,  which  is  the  basis 
and  pre-condition  of  the  future  resurrection  of 
aU  flesh.^both  these  have  their  beginning  at  the 
very  point  where  the  prophet's  scope  of  v-ision 
ends,  and  by  that  fact  attest  the  truth  and  the 
Divine  origin  of   his  predictions,  to  which  the 
Lord  would  assuredly  not  have  repeatedly  ap- 
pealed and  referred,  had  He  not  considered  this 
book  equal,  in  its  inspired  character,  to  any  of 
the  remaining  prophets  of  the  Old  Covenant  (cf. 
the  Introd.  §  6). 

2.  The  prophecy,  which  forms  the  second  lead- 
ing thought  of  this  section,  relates  to  the  point 
of  time  of  the  end.  It  repeats  in  substance  the 
mystical  [?]  measure  of  time  noticed  in  a  former 
section,  by  which  the  Last  severe  trouble  of  God's 
people  should  continue  during  three  and  a  half 
times,  and  adds  a  further  period  of  one  and  a  half 
months,  during  which  the  last  remnants  of  suf- 
fering and  trouble  shall  be  removed.     It  was 


shown  above  that  the  historical  conditions  of 
the  Maccabseau  period  afford  but  little  counte- 
nance to  the  as.sumption  that  these  periods  of 
1290  and  1333  days  were  invented  to  accord  with 
the  course  of  events  in  the  experience  of  the 
past.     It  was  also  shown  in  a  former  instance 
(on  chap.  vii.  So)  that  the  underlying  idea,  which 
is  common  to  all  the  parallel  mystical  limitations 
of  time  (the  half-week,  the  three  and  a  half 
times,  the   1150,    1290,  1335  days),   is  that  the 
time  of  suffering  should  be  sliortencd, — that  the' 
time  of   tribulation   should   indeed  begin,    but 
should  be  broken  through  at  the  middle,  and  by 
the  grace  of  God  should  quickly  be  brought  to 
its  close.     It  is  consequently  a  time  to  which 
the  words  of  the  Saviour  respecting  the  shorten- 
ing of  the  days  of  tribulation  (lio'/M.iu&ijuni,  Matt. 
xxiv.  22 ;   Mark  xiii.  20)  wUl  apply.     It  will  be 
sufficient  to  notice,  in  this  connection,  that  this 
mysterious  period,   which  received  a  first  ap- 
proximate  [!]   fulfilment  in  the  great  religious 
persecution  of  the  Jews  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
appeared  a  second  time  in  the  Jewish  war,  which 
ended  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus 
(A.D.  66-70),  and  that  a  thiid  and  final  fulfil- 
ment of  the  same  period  is  in  anticipation,  in  the 
last  days  before  the  return  of  Christ,  according 
to  Rev.  xii.  14  ;    xiii.    5,  when  the  church  shall 
be  overtaken  by  a  time  of  severe  trial  and  puri- 
fication.    Cf.   Auberlen   (Daniel,  p.    287),   who, 
somewhat  vaguely  and  generally    characterizes 
the  three  and  a  half  times  as  '  •  the  period  of  the 
world-power,  during  which  the  supremacy  over 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  given  to  the  earthly 
kingdoms,"  and  then  proceeds  :   "  So,  then,  this 
number  is  resumed  in  the  Apocalypse,  in  order 
to  characterize  the  times  of  the  heathen,  during 
which  Jerusalem  is  trodden  under  foot,  and  in 
which,  con.sequently,   the  kingdom  of  God  has 
wholly  lost  its  outward  and  visible  existence  in 
the  earth — hence  the  times  from  the  Roman  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  to  the  return  of  Christ 
(more   correctly,   without  doubt,   the   last  and 
most  momentous   epoch  of   that  time,   or   the 
epoch  of  the  New-Test.  Antichrist).     Cf.  Luke 
xxi.  24,  and  Rev.  xi.  2,  both  of  which  speak  of 
the  treading  under  foot  of  the  holy  city  by  the 
heathen,  to  continue,  according  to  the  former 
passage,  until  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  are  ful- 
filled, and,  according  to  the  latter,  until  forty- 
two  months!  =  3A  years  =  12li0  days)  are  past. 
To  this  negative  designation  Rev.  xiii.  5  adds  a 
positive,    according    to    which    the    forty-two 
months  denote  the  duration  of  the  power  of  the 
beast,  i.e.,  of  the  world-power.     The  only  re- 
maining passage  in  the  Apocalypse  which  men- 
tions the  1260  days,  chap.  xi.  3,  might  likewise 
be  explained  by  this  opinion.   .   .   .   The  congre- 
gation therefore  finds  room  in  the  heathen  world, 
but  it  is  also  given  over  to  the  dominion  of  the 
world-power  ;  it  rests  under  the  protection  of 
that  power,  but  also  under  its  pressure  ;  it  is  a 
suffering  and  militant  church  to  this  day.     Pre- 
cisely this  correlation  of  protection  and  oppres- 
sion forms  the  specific  feature  of  the  relation  of 
the  congregation  to  the  world-power  throug'nout 
the  history  of  the  church."     Delitzsch  (p.  285) 
is  more  cautious,  that  is,  he  avoids  the  excessive 
extension  of  the  three  and  a  half  times  until 
they  cover  a  period  of  many  centuries,  and  con- 
tents himself  with  observing  that  "  in  the  anti- 
typical  history  of  the  last  times,  these  measures 


272 


THE  PROPHET  DANIEL. 


of  time,  the  three  and  a  half  years,  1390  and 
1335  days,  shall  yet  become  important ; "  and 
Kliefoth  (p.  503)  contends  for  that  interpreta- 
tion of  the  three  and  a  half  times  which  holds  ; 
that  they  denote  "the  highest  development  of 
the  power  of  Antichrist,  and  his  end,"  imme- 
diately before  the  manifestation  of  Christ. 

Probably  the  opinion  of  those  is  likewise  not 
to  be  at  once  rejected,  who  hold  that  there  was 
also  a  tyjjical  relation  between  the  three  and  a 
half  times  of  Daniel  and  the  public  life  of  Jesus, 
■which  covered  three  to  four  years,  whether  they 
regard  the  latter  period  as  a  period  of  coijtinued 
ti'ial  and  suffering,  which  became  more  intense 
toward  its  close  (cf .  Luke  xiii.  6-9  :  the  three 
years  of  laborious  and  vain  attempts  on  the  part 
of  the  Lord  to  convert  the  barren  fig-tree.  Israel), 
or  whether  they  find  in  it  the  first  half  of  the 
mystical  week  mentioned  in  chap.  ix.  27,  and 
let  the  second,  which  corresponds  directly  to  the 
three  and  a  half  years,  follow  immediately  after- 
ward (cf .  supra,  the  history  of  the  exposition  of 
chap.  ix.  24-27).  Ebrard  has  recently  put  forth 
a  particularly  noteworthy  effort  to  carry  out  the 
latter  of  these  views,  with  special  regard  to  the 
chronology  of  the  leadii^  events  in  the  life  of 
Christ,  although  his  attempt  involves  much  that 
is  artificial  and  axhitxary  (ChristUche  Dogmatik^ 
2d  ed..  II.  747;  cf.  his  Kritik  der  emng. 
Gcschichte,  3d  ed.,  pp.  105,  196  et  seq.  ; — and 
for  a  criticism  of  his  views,  cf.  Biihring,  in 
Schenkel's  Allg.  kirchl.  Zeitschrlft,  1867,  p. 
579). 

3.  Homiktical  suc/gestkins. — As  in  the  Oratio 
esehatologicii  by  Christ  (Matt.  xxiv.  par.)  and 
especially  in  its  intermediate  parts  (vs.  29-36), 
so  in  the  present  section  there  are  two  piincipal 
questions  whose  investigation  devolves  on  the 
honiUetical  student ;  and  they  succeed  each 
other  in  the  same  order  as  in  that  section  of  the 
gospels  :  (1)  the  question  concerning  the  pre- 
conditions and  the  course  of  the  end  of  the  world 
and  the  final  judgment  (see  vs.  1-3)  ;  and  (2)  the 
question  relating  to  the  preceding  development, 
or  to  the  time  of  the  end  of  the  world  (see  v.  5  et 
seq. ).  In  answer  to  the  first  question,  vs.  1-3 
indicate  that  the  .sufferings  and  sorrows  of  God's 
people  shall  attain  to  an  unprecedented  height, 
as  a  necessary  preparation  for  their  deliverance 
by  the  Messiah  ;  and  further,  that  the  general 
resurrection  of  all  the  dead,  whether  pious  or 
godless,  forms  a  prerequisite  and  preparation  to 
pave  the  way  for  the  judgment  of  the  world, 
which  is  to  dispense  eternal  rewards  and  pun- 
ishments. The  revealing  angel  answers  the 
second  question  in  vs.  7,  11,  and  12.  so  far  as  to 
state  that  the  last  times  shall  constitute  a  period 
of  suffering,  through  which  the  faithful  ones 
must  urge  their  way,  but  which  shall  be  short- 
ened and  broken  through  at  the  middle  by  the 
grace  of  God, — in  which  is  contained,  at  the 
same  time,  a  reference  to  the  sudden  .and  unex- 
pected introduction  of  the  final  time  of  the  end, 
or  to  the  coming  of  the  judge  of  the  world  like 
a  thief  in  the  night  (Matt.  xxiv.  36,  42,  44; 
Luke  xxi.  34  et  seq.  ;  1  Thess.  v.  3  et  seq.). 
The  solution  of  both  questions  leads  to  an  ex- 
liortation  to  patient,  contented,  and  watchful 
waiting  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  re- 
specting the  last  end  (vs.  4,  9,  13 — cf.  Matt, 
xxiv.  33  et  seq.,  43  et  seq.  ;  xxv.  1  et  seq.). 
Thus  all  the  leading  features  of  the  Scriptural 


doctrine  of  the  last  things  (Mors  tua,  judicium 
postremwn,  gloria  ccili,  et  dolor  inferni,  etc.)  are 
comprehended  within  the  narrow  limits  of  thia 
chapter,  and  are  there  properly  arranged  for 
practical  and  edifying  discussion,  either  in  a 
single  study  or  in  several. 

Single  passages. 

On  V.  1,  Luther  :  "  This  does  not  signify  phy- 
sical sufferings,  which  were  far  greater  at  the 
de.struction  of  Jerusalem,  in  Rome,  and  in  many 
other  cities  and  countries  ;  but  the  suffering  of 
souls,  or  the  spiritual  affliction  of  the  church,  as 
prefigured  by  the  sufferings  of  Christ.  For  phy- 
sical sufferings  are  temporarj',  and  cease  with 
the  body.  But  the  question  here  is  whether  the 
church  shall  fall  or  stand,  which  the  devil  had 
attacked  in  two  directions  through  the  agency 
of  Antichrist :  on  the  one  hand,  by  an  Epicurean 
contempt  for  the  sacraments  and  the  Word  uf 
God,  on  the  other,  by  the  ten'ors  and  despair  of 
conscience,  in  which  no  proper  comfort  of  the 
graces  (was  found),  but  only  wretched  tortures, 
which  vexed  men  with  the  sufficiency  of  their 
own  doings  and  with  their  works  (of  which,  how- 
ever, the  Epicureans  and  heathen  know  nothing) ; 
hence,  that  it  was  time  that  Michael  should 
arouse  himself,  and  not  suffer  Christendom  to 
be  destroyed  at  its  last.gasp,  but  to  comfort  and 
collect  it  again  by  his  beneficent  word  of  grace." 
— Melancthon  :  '''Semper  opart  et  nobis  notam 
esse  et  infixam  animis  hane  doctrinam,  quod  Ec- 
elesia  sit  subjecta  cruci,  et  cur  nit  suhjeeta.  videli- 
cit,  quia  mdt  Deus  intelligi  ab  EccUsia  iram  ad- 
versus  peccatum,  qimm  mundns  contemnit.  .  .  . 
Agnoscant  igitur  pii  Ecelesiw  a:rnm?ms.  et  propter 
Dei  gloriam  ac  propriam  salutem  et  publicam 
necessitatem  acrius  incumbantin  Ecangelii studi- 
um,  et  toto  pectore  Deum  inrocent,  ut  Ecclesiam 
conservet,  defendat,  et  aiigeat.  —  Quatnor  autem 
consolationes  h.  I.  traduntur,  qum  piis  omnibus 
semper  in  conspectu  esse  debent :  1.  Prima  est, 
quod  Ecclcsia  non  sit  penitus  interitura,  sed  tunc 
quoque  in  illis  periculis  duratura.  2.  Secunda 
consoUitio,  quod  ibi  sunt  fiitura  Ecclesire  membra, 
ubicumque  erunt  amplectentes  purnm  Evangelii 
doctrinam  ;  erit  enim,  ut  inquit,  dispersio popuU 
(cfr.  V.  7).  3.  Tertia  con.mlatio,  quodinhis  tantis 
])erici.dis  habitura  git  Ecclesia  difensorcm  Filium 
Dei  (Michaelem).  4.  Quarta  consolatio  est.  quam 
hie  quoque  proponit  Angelus :  Qmim  O'rumno' 
non  sint  futures  perpetuev .  hac  spe  faeilins  ens 
feramus,  quod  pits  promittitur  yloriosa  liberatio 
et  aterna  Itetitia ;  impiis  iiero  'denuntiantur 
eeterni  cruciatus." — Starke:  "God  permits  the 
persecution  of  His  church  to  reach  its  highest 
point  that  His  help  may  be  so  much  the  more 
glorious." 

On  vs.  2.  3,  Jerome:  "  Opprcsso  Antichristo 
et  spiritu  Sali-atoris  extincto  salrabitur  populus, 
qui  scriptus  fuerit  in  libra  Iiei,  et  pro  diversitate 
meritorum  alii  resurgent  in  titam  ceternam.  et 
alii  in  opprobrium  sempit^rnum.  Magistri  autem 
habebunt  similitudinern  eali,  et  qui  alios  erudier- 
unt,  stellarum  fulgori  comparabuntur.  NoN 
ENIM  BUPFICIT  SCIRE  SAPIENTIAM,  NISI  ET 
ALIOS  ERUDIAS  ;  TACITlTbQUE  8KRMO  DOCTRI- 
NiE,  ALIUM  NON  iEDIFICANS  (cfr.  1  Cor.  xiv. 
3  BS.),  MERCEDEM  OPEKIS  RECIPERE  KON 
POTEST." — Melancthon  :  "  FaciUut  fcrinius  hu- 
jus  fito'  miserias,  cum  quasi  vutam  prospieimus, 
et  seimus  aliquando  MecUsiam  ex  tantis  malii 
eluctaturam  esse Videmus  nunc  qiiidem 


CHAP.  XII.  1-13. 


973 


mitere  dmipatum,  esse  populum  Dei :  quare  iion 
procul  abest  resMcitatio  mortuorum.'''' — Starke  : 
'•  Since  the  faithful  martyrs,  who  loved  not 
their  lives  unto  the  death,  are  to  have  the  pre- 
ference over  others  in  the  resurrection  (1  Cor. 
XV.  23  et  seq.),  should  it  contradict  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  that  the  greatest  persecutors  of  the 
church,  as  the  fii'st-bora  sons  of  hell,  should  be 
raised  before  the  general  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  and  be  the  first  to  be  cast  into  hell  with 
soul  and  body  (comp.  Rev.  xix.  20  with  Rom.  ii. 
9)  ? — Forward,  then,  ye  teachers  of  the  Gospel  ! 
do  not  become  wearied  in  your  oiEce  !  Rather 
devote  tongue,  pen,  and  life  to  point  men  to 
Christ  as  the  true  righteousness !  Suffer  in 
patience  everything  that  the  wicked  world  can 
do  to  you  on  that  account !  The  magnitude  of 
your  gracious  reward  is  well  worth  such  indus- 
try and  patience  !  "  On  v.  4,  Jerome  :  "'Etiatn 
iit  Apocalypsi  Joannis  liber  tidetur  xiguatut  sep- 

tem  sigiilis  intus  et  /oris Librum  antem 

ilium  potest  solvere,  qui  Scripturarum,  sacrameiUa 
cognovit,  et  intelligit  cenigmata  et  verba  tenebrosa 
propter  inysterioi'um  magnitudinem,  et  interpre- 
tatur  parabolas,  et  oceiddentem  littram  transfert 
in  spirituM  •cimfieantetn."  —  Osiander  :  "  The 
Divine  prophecies  are  only  then  correctly  under- 
stood when  they  are  in  course  of  fulfilment  (cf.  2 
Pet.  i.  20)." 

On  vs.  7,  11,  13,  Melancthon:  "■  McUb  sunt 
temporuni  mirabili  consiUo  Dei  oonstitutm.  Et 
quanquam  Ckristus  diem  ilium  noli patri  notvm 
esse  inquit  nee  milt  nos  curiose  qnarere  certum 
diem  ant  annnm,  sed  semper  relut  in  stations 
paratos  expectare  ilium  Iwtissimum  diem,  quo  se 
ostendet  vniverso  Inimano  generi  et  cnm  sua 
Ecdesia  triumphabit ;  tamen  breritas  hujus 
mundi  vane  significata  est." — Calvin:  "  Quam- 
I'ii  Daniel  non  stulta  curiositnte  inductus  quo'si- 
erit  ex  Angela  de  fine  mirabilium,  tamen  non  ob- 
tinet,  quod  petebut,  quia  scilicet  roluit  Deus  ad 
modum  alUjucm  intdligi,  rpiR  pradixerat,  sed 
tamen  aliquid  manere  occiiltinn,  usquedum  veniret 
tnaturum  plena  remlittionis  t-empus.  Hax  igitur 
ratio  est,  cur  Angelas  non  eaaudiat  Danielem. 
Pium  quidem  erat  ejus  cotum  i^neguc  enim  optat 
18 


quicquam  scire  plus  q nam  jus  esset),  verum  Deus 
scit  quid  opus  sit,  ideo  non  concessit,  quod  opta- 
bat." — Geier  (in  Starke)  :  "The  last  times  will 
be  terrible  and  dangerous ;  but  they  have  their 
definite  hmits." 

On  V.  10,  Theodoret :  dlSk  yap  Set  traaiv  d;r/iuc 
-pocKtlcdat  rii  \^ela,  iiAA'  ol  fif:v  voij^ove^  6ta  rij^ 
avu-&€v  avTo't^  x^PVyovfJ-evT]^  yvoioeug  avv^aovatv,  oi 
de  avofjLia  aal  6voaE0Eig  ov^givte^  ovdev  tl>v  kyKei- 
fih'ui'  votjcat  dwrjoovrai,  hrav  6e  eTiOy  Ta  Tzpuyfiara^ 
Ga^ut;  ruf  ~EfH  Toi'Tuv  fia-HijOovraL  7Tpo(f,r/rE(a(;. — 
Luther :  ' '  For  however  brightly  and  powerfully 
the  Gospel  moves,  and  however  strong  the  church 
may  be,  there  must  still  be  heretics  and  false 
teachers  to  prove  her,  in  order  that  the  approved 
ones  may  be  manifest ;  and  these  same  heretics 
are  fond  of  taking  sides  with  kings  and  great 
lords.     Consequently  the  heretics  wiU  continue 

to  the  end But  to  the  godless  he   (ths 

prophet,  or,  rather,  his  prophecy)  is  of  uo  ser- 
vice, as  he  himself  remarks :  the  wicked  shall 
remain  wicked,  and  not  regard  it.  For  this  pro- 
phecy and  similar  ones  were  not  written  that  we 
might  (beforehand  exactly)  know  history  and 
the  troubles  of  the  future,  so  as  to  feed  our 
curiosity  as  with  an  item  of  news ;  but  that  the 
pious  might  comfort  themselves  and  rejoice  over 
them,  and  that  they  should  strengthen  their 
faith  and  hope  in  patience,  as  those  that  see  and 
hear  that  their  wretchedness  shall  have  an  end, 
and  that  they,  delivered  from  sin,  death,  the 
devil,  and  every  evil,  shall  come  to  Christ  in 
heaven,  in  his  blessed  eternal  kingdom." 

On  V.  13,  Tubing.  Bibel:  "How  blessed  wUl 
it  seem  to  rest  in  the  bosom  of  the  Lord,  after 
the  work  of  this  life  is  done,  until  the  day  of 
restitution  shall  come,  when  we  shall  arise, 
every  one  to  the  gracious  lot  that  shall  fall  to 
him." — Starke:  "At  length  the  sufferings  of 
the  faithful  reach  a  joyous  end ;  then  follow 
rest  and  sweet  refreshing,  and  finally  a  glorious 
resurrection,  when  with  their  glorified  bodies 
they  shall  enter  into  the  joy  of  their  Lord." 
Blessed  is  he  who  with  Daniel  shall  receive  a 
similar  lot.     Amen. 


Date  Due 

0  18  -S? 

1 

4i  15  49 

[m- 

,v  .- 

Wu;     -'S 

r 

» 

1 

Mlk^^^ 

Mb 

1 

_J 

